Dismissed

Chandran.M v. The General Manager (Administration)

Madras HC12 Oct 2023WP(MD)/17862/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court dismissed a writ petition challenging a transfer order issued by TNSTC. The petitioner contested the transfer as a disguised punishment following a suspended drunken driving charge, but the High Court found no error in the administrative order and denied relief.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed with no costs; the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.

Chandran.M Vs The General Manager (Administration) — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.17862 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 12.10.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶6

W.P(MD)No.17862 of 2023 and W.M.P(MD)No.14947 of 2023

M.Chandran

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The General Manager (Administration), TNSTC (Madurai) Ltd., Dindigul Region, Dindigul, Dindigul District.

¶11

2.The Branch Manager, TNSTC, Cumbum Branch, Cumbum, Theni District.

¶12

3.The Branch Manager, TNSTC, Palani Branch, Palani, Dindigul District. ... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the 1^st Respondent impugned proceedings in Ref.Admn/P2/109-1, dated 05.07.2023 and the 2^nd respondent's consequential communication No.1699/OSM-I, dated 08.07.2023 and quash the same as illegal and further direct the 1^st and 2^nd

¶14

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/5

¶15

W.P(MD)No.17862 of 2023

¶16

respondents to permit the petitioner to continue his service at Cumbum I, TNSTC Branch, Theni District.

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.S.M.Anantha Murugan For Respondents : Mr.S.C.Herold Singh Standing Counsel

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The present writ petition has been filed by the Driver of the respondent Transport Corporation challenging the order of transfer from Cumbum branch to Pazhani Branch.

¶20

A perusal of the order impugned in the writ petition indicates that it is due to administrative reasons.

¶21

However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that a charge memo has been issued to him on 28.06.2023 and he was placed under suspension for a period of 7 days. Only as a punishment, the present order of transfer has been effected.

¶22

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/5

¶23

W.P(MD)No.17862 of 2023

¶24

I have perused the charge memo which indicates that on

¶25

28.06.2023 on the basis of certain complaints, he has been subjected to Alcohol Breath Analyser Test and it was found that he was in a drunken mood while driving the vehicle. On the basis of the said allegations, he has been issued with charge memo and he was suspended for a period of 7 days. After revoking the order of suspension, the present order of transfer has been passed. In order to maintain discipline among the employees and considering the safety of the passengers, the respondent Corporation has passed this order. This Court does not find any error in the order. There are no grounds to interfere in the order.

¶26

In view of the above, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶27

12.10.2023

¶28

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes

¶29

gbg

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/5

¶31

W.P(MD)No.17862 of 2023

¶32

¶33

1.The General Manager (Administration), TNSTC (Madurai) Ltd., Dindigul Region, Dindigul, Dindigul District.

¶34

2.The Branch Manager, TNSTC, Cumbum Branch, Cumbum, Theni District.

¶35

3.The Branch Manager, TNSTC, Palani Branch, Palani, Dindigul District.

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/5

¶37

W.P(MD)No.17862 of 2023

¶38

R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.

¶39

gbg

¶40

Order made in W.P(MD)No.17862 of 2023

¶41

Dated: 12.10.2023

¶42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/5

Chandran.M v. The General Manager (Administration)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandran.M v. The General Manager (Administration)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sivasubramanian.S Vs The Chief Engineer (Personal)

Johnson.v Vs The District Collector

Dhaya. J Vs The Chief Educational Officer

Kamalanathan. M Vs The Commissioner

Lakshmanan Vs The Secretary

P.Dharmaraj Vs The Director of Town Panchayat