Writ petition against a transport corporation's order demoting the petitioner from Senior Conductor to Conductor for alleged ticketless fare misappropriation. The Court, without expressing any opinion on merits, disposed of it by directing the petitioner to file an appeal and the Managing Director to decide it within time frames.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.(MD) No.25454 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 24.10.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
W.P.(MD) No.25454 of 2022 and W.M.P.(MD) No.19542 of 2022
R.Ramamoorthy ... Petitioner
-vs-
The General Manager Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd. Dindigul Region Bye Pass Road Dindigul District ... Respondent
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the respondent in ref.LD2KY/526 dated 19.08.2020, quash the
same.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.M.Xavier For Respondent : Mr.S.C.Herold Singh Standing Counsel
_____________ Page 1 of 5_
W.P.(MD) No.25454 of 2022
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 19.08.2020, passed by the respondent, imposing the punishment of “demoting the petitioner to the post of Conductor from the post of Senior Conductor and fixing his basic pay at the basic pay of the post of Conductor”.
2. The petitioner claims that without any evidence and without examining any of the passengers in the bus as a witness in the enquiry proceedings, the Enquiry Officer has arbitrarily and illegally submitted an enquiry report in the disciplinary proceedings by holding him guilty of the charges framed against him in the disciplinary proceedings. The charges framed against the petitioner in the disciplinary proceedings were that he had misappropriated a sum of Rs.40/- by not issuing tickets to the passengers, despite collecting money from them.
3. Aggrieved by the impugned order imposing the aforesaid punishment, the petitioner is having the remedy of filing an appeal before the Managing Director of the respondent – Transport Corporation. Instead of filing an appeal, the petitioner has directly filed this writ petition, though the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that an appeal was in fact
_____________ Page 2 of 5_
W.P.(MD) No.25454 of 2022
filed before the Managing Director of the respondent – Transport Corporation in person and the same has also been acknowledged by the Managing Director and no order has been passed.
4. However, the above contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is disputed by the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent – Transport Corporation.
5. No prejudice will be caused to the respondent – Transport Corporation if a direction is issued to the petitioner to file an appeal as against the impugned order within a time frame to be fixed by this Court and a direction is issued to the Managing Director of the respondent – Transport Corporation to entertain the appeal and pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner is also agreeable for the same. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent – Transport Corporation has also not raised any serious objection for issuing such a direction.
_____________ Page 3 of 5_
W.P.(MD) No.25454 of 2022
7. This Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the
petitioner's case, as it is for the Managing Director of the respondent – Transport Corporation being the appellate authority to decide the same on merits and in accordance with law.
8. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the petitioner to file an appeal aggrieved by the impugned order dated 19.08.2020, passed by the respondent, before the Managing Director of the respondent – Transport Corporation, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the said appeal, the Managing Director of the respondent – Transport Corporation shall pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks thereafter. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
24.10.2025
NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No
krk
_____________ Page 4 of 5_
W.P.(MD) No.25454 of 2022
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
krk
W.P.(MD) No.25454 of 2022 and W.M.P.(MD) No.19542 of 2022
24.10.2025
_____________ Page 5 of 5_
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the demotion order could be entertained despite the availability of an appellate remedy before the Managing Director.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
R.Ramamoorthy
The General Manager Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Madurai) Ltd.
Abdul Quddhose
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
