Writ appeal against reinstatement order; prolonged suspension held punitive; subsistence allowance without work not in public interest; appeal dismissed.
The Single Judge's order directing reinstatement of the writ petitioner is upheld; the appeal is dismissed. ¶¶28
When suspension gets prolonged without any justifiable reason, it acquires a punitive character. ¶¶26
W.A.(MD)No.755 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 11.08.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR
W.A.(MD)No.755 of 2020 and
C.M.P.(MD)No.4337 of 2020
The Dean, Thanjavur Medical College Hospital, Thanjavur. ... Appellant
Vs.
Victor William ... Respondent
Prayer : Writ Appeal filed under Clause XV of Letters Patent, to allow the writ appeal by setting aside the order passed in W.P.(MD)No.26443 of 2019 dated 28.01.2020 on the file of this Court.
For Appellant : Mr.N.Satheeshkumar, Addl. Government Pleader
For Respondent : No appearance
1/4
W.A.(MD)No.755 of 2020
JUDGMENT (By G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.)
Heard both sides.
2.This writ appeal has been filed against the order dated 28.01.2020 made in W.P.(MD)No.26443 of 2019. The writ petitioner was implicated in a criminal case and was placed under suspension on 23.12.2013. He sought reinstatement and revocation of the suspension order. His request was rejected by the appellant vide order dated 17.02.2014. Questioning the same, W.P.(MD)No.26443 of 2019 was filed. The learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition vide order dated 28.01.2020 in the following terms:-
“7.For all the reasons stated above, the impugned order dated 17.02.2014 in Ref.No.13075/E6/2013 passed by the respondent is set aside. Consequently, the respondent is directed to reinstate the petitioner immediately, in any case, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is open to the respondent to transfer the petitioner to any other office, if the respondent may choose do so.”
2/4
W.A.(MD)No.755 of 2020
3.Though the learned Single Judge had erroneously invoked Ajay
Kumar Choudhary's case, we are of the view that the relief granted to the writ petitioner can be sustained on a different ground altogether. When the suspension order was passed in the year 2013, it could not
have been kept alive for seven long years. When suspension gets prolonged without any justifiable reason, it acquires a punitive character. This Court has consistently held that granting substance allowance to the
extent of 75% without extracting any work is not in public interest.
4.In this view of the matter, the writ appeal is dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(G.R.S. J.,) & (K.R.S. J.,) 11.08.2025
NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No ias
To:
The Dean, Thanjavur Medical College Hospital, Thanjavur.
3/4
W.A.(MD)No.755 of 2020
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J. and K.RAJASEKAR, J.
ias
W.A.(MD)No.755 of 2020
11.08.2025
4/4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Single Judge's order directing reinstatement of the writ petitioner was sustainable.¶¶28
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Ajay Kumar ChoudharyDistinguished¶¶24
Ajay Kumar Choudhary's case
How this case reached the court
order dated 28.01.2020 made in W.P.(MD)No.26443 of 2019¶¶19
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court (Single Judge) · 28.01.2020
The writ petitioner was implicated in a criminal case and was placed under suspension on 23.12.2013. His request was rejected by the appellant vide order dated 17.02.2014. Questioning the same, W.P.(MD)No.26443 of 2019 was filed.¶¶19
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
