Allowed

Karuppiah.M v. The Managing Director

Madras HC2 Nov 2023WP(MD)/9011/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench allowed a writ petition filed by a TASMAC supervisor challenging his suspension. The Court quashed the suspension order on the ground that departmental proceedings had been concluded and the petitioner was ordered to pay the shortage amount, directing him to work out remedies against the penalty.

What did the court decide?

The order of suspension is quashed. The petition stands allowed. The petitioner is directed to work out remedies against the penalty.

Karuppiah.M Vs The Managing Director — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

W.P.(MD).No.9011 of 2023

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 02.11.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

¶6

W.P(MD)No.9011 of 2023 and

¶7

W.M.P(MD) No.8169 of 2023

M.Karuppiah

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Managing Director,

¶12

Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited, (TASMAC), CMDA Tower-II,

¶13

Gandhi Erwin Bridge Road,

¶14

Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.

¶15

The Senior Regional Manager,

¶16

Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited, (TASMAC), Plot No.100, Annanagar,

¶17

Madurai – 625 020.

¶18

The District Manager,

¶19

Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited, (TASMAC),

¶20

Theni, Theni District. ... Respondents

¶21

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order issued by the third respondent in Na.Ka.No. 000470/2022/A1, dated 24.01.2023 and quash the same.

¶22

1/5

¶23

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

¶24

W.P.(MD).No.9011 of 2023

¶25

For Petitioner : Mr.Shaji Chellan.L For Respondents : Mr.S.Sivanesan Standing Counsel

¶26

O R D E R

¶27

The present Writ Petition has been filed by a Supervisor of Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited, (TASMAC) challenging an order of suspension on the ground that during internal audit, shortage of stock was found. A perusal of the impugned suspension order indicates that in contemplation of a departmental enquiry, the writ petitioner has been placed under suspension.

¶28

2. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the TASMAC brought to the notice of this Court that the final orders have been passed on 23.08.2023, wherein, penalty has been imposed upon the writ petitioner and he has been directed to pay the amount within a period of seven days.

¶29

3. The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner has not received any instructions with regard to the compliance of the said order.

¶30

2/5

¶31

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

¶32

W.P.(MD).No.9011 of 2023

¶33

4. Since the departmental proceedings has already been concluded and

¶34

punishment has been imposed upon the writ petitioner, this Court is inclined to quash the order of suspension. It is for the writ petitioner to work out his remedy against the penalty in the manner known to law.

¶35

5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands allowed. There shall be no

¶36

order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶37

02.11.2023 NCC : Yes/No 2/2 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No ebsi

¶38

3/5

¶39

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

¶40

W.P.(MD).No.9011 of 2023

¶41

¶42

The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited, (TASMAC)

¶43

CMDA Tower-II, Gandhi Erwin Bridge Road, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.

¶44

The Senior Regional Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited, (TASMAC),

¶45

Plot No.100, Annanagar, Madurai – 625 020.

¶46

The District Manager, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited, (TASMAC),

¶47

Theni, Theni District.

¶48

4/5

¶49

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

¶50

W.P.(MD).No.9011 of 2023

¶51

R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.

¶52

ebsi

¶53

W.P(MD)No.9011 of 2023

02.11.2023

2/2

5/5

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

Karuppiah.M v. The Managing Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Karuppiah.M v. The Managing Director

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

S.Karuppasamy Vs v.Saravanan

K. Rajasekaran, Vs M. Balakrishnan

The Correspondent, Vs Kakarla Usha, I.A.S.

Sakthivel.S Vs State of Tamil Nadu

Venkatesan.R Vs the Director General of Police

Balamurugan.R Vs The Managing Director