Dismissed¶43

C. Suresh Kumar v. The Government of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC4 Mar 2025WP(MD)/5681/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Maintainability of Article 226 writ petition against departmental/fact-finding enquiry report — held not maintainable; enquiry committee is a fact-finding body for the employer; enquiry report does not affect petitioner's rights or vested rights; alternative remedies: civil suit for damages or consumer forum for deficiency in service against Government hospital; alleged misbehaviour by pharmacist at Arumanai Government Hospital on 31.08.2024; CCTV footage; prayer for fresh enquiry and action for fabricating false evidence rejected; writ dismissed, no costs; connected W.M.P closed; Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, single judge V.Lakshminarayanan, decided 04.03.2025.

What did the court decide?

An enquiry committee appointed by the employer to test allegations against an employee is, by its very nature, only a fact-finding body. ¶37

C. Suresh Kumar Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶43

Issue for consideration

Whether a writ petition under Article 226 challenging an internal fact-finding enquiry report into a complaint against a hospital employee is maintainable.

¶43

Court's answer

An enquiry committee appointed by the employer to test allegations against an employee is, by its very nature, only a fact-finding body.

¶37

Ratio / Principle

An enquiry report neither affects the rights of the petitioner nor takes away any vested right from his hands.

¶38

Key takeaways

If the petitioner has been abused, his remedy is to approach the civil court for damages or the consumer court for deficiency in service at the hands of Arumanai Government Hospital.ratio¶38
A writ petition challenging such an enquiry report is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed, leaving the petitioner free to approach the forum that can grant relief against the hospital and the 7th respondent.ratio¶43

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench), V.Lakshminarayanan J., 04.03.2025 — W.P(MD)No.5681 of 2025: Petitioner, treated at Arumanai Government Hospital, alleged that the 7th respondent (pharmacist) misbehaved with him on 31.08.2024, that the incident was captured on CCTV, and that an enquiry report dated 02.11.2024 by a two-doctor committee (appointed by the Joint Director on his complaint) wrongly exonerated the 7th respondent without examining nurse Varghese Mary Jerold. He sought certiorarified mandamus to quash the report, a fresh enquiry with CCTV footage, and action against respondents 5 and 6 for fabricating false evidence. Held: the enquiry committee is, by its very nature, only a fact-finding body for the employer; the report neither affects the petitioner's rights nor takes away any vested right; his remedy lies in a civil suit for damages or a consumer complaint for deficiency of service against the hospital. The writ petition challenging the enquiry report is not maintainable and is dismissed with no costs; connected miscellaneous petition closed; petitioner left open to approach the appropriate forum.

¶1

W.P(MD)No.5681 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 04.03.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN

¶6

Writ Petition(MD)No.5681 of 2025 and W.M.P(MD)No.4141 of 2025

C.Sureshkumar

..Petitioner

1.The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

¶11

2.The Director,

¶12

Directorate of Medical and Rural Health Services in Tamil Nadu,

¶13

DMS Campus,

¶14

Teynempet, Chennai.

¶15

3.The District Collector, Kanyakumari District, At Nagercoil.

¶16

4.The Joint Director, Medical, Rural Health Services, Nagercoil- 629 002. Kanyakumari District.

¶17

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

¶18

1/6

¶19

W.P(MD)No.5681 of 2025

¶20

5.Dr.Zufire Hassan Mohammed Khan, Deputy Director, Medical Services (Asthma) Kanyakumari Government Medical College, Asaripallam, Kanyakumari District.

¶21

6.Dr.Rajaiyan Superintendent of Hospital, District Head Office of Government Hospital, Padmanabhapuram, Kanyakumari District.

¶22

7.Jeba Gift Singh Pharmacist, Arumanai Government Hospital, Arumanai Post, Kanyakumari District.

¶23

..Respondents

¶24

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 enquiry report dated 02.11.2024 furnished by the 5th and 6th respondents based on the petitioner's representation and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the 1st respondent to appoint higher officers to conduct fresh enquiry with production of CCTV footage available in the Government Hospital, Arumanai to look into the incident happened on 31.08.2024 and to file enquiry report and to take action against the respondents 5 and 6 for fabricating false evidence in collusion with the 7th respondent within a stipulated period that may be fixed by this court.

¶25

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sivakumar

¶26

For Respondent : Mr.S.Vinoth Govt. Advocate (for RR1 to 5)

¶27

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

¶28

2/6

¶29

W.P(MD)No.5681 of 2025

¶30

ORDER

¶31

The petitioner seeks to quash the enquiry report dated 02.11.2024 furnished by the respondents 5 and 6 based on his representation and to direct the first respondent to appoint higher officers to conduct a fresh enquiry with the production of CCTV footage available in the Government Hospital, Arumanai, to look into the incident that happened on 31.08.2024 and to file an enquiry report and to take action against the respondents 5 and 6 for fabricating false evidence in collusion with the 7^th respondent.

¶32

The petitioner states that he was taking treatment at Arumanai Government Hospital. At that time, when he went for treatment, the 7^th respondent misbehaved with him. The petitioner pleads that the entire incident on 31.08.2024 was recorded in CCTV camera and despite the same, an enquiry report was submitted exonerating the 7^th respondent. The petitioner pleads that the defence that has been raised by the 7^th respondent that the petitioner had sought medicines beyond the period that had been prescribed by the doctor is a false one. He further states that a nurse, by name, Varghese Mary Jerold had not been examined during his presence. On these grounds, he seeks to quash the enquiry report.

¶33

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

¶34

3/6

¶35

W.P(MD)No.5681 of 2025

¶36

I heard Mr.S.Sivakumar, for the petitioner and Mr.S.Vinoth, learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 to 5.

¶37

On the complaint given by the petitioner, the fourth respondent had decided to initiate an enquiry to find out the truth. Two doctors, one holding the rank of Deputy Director of Medical Services and the other one being the Superintendent of Hospitals at Padmanabhapuram, were appointed. These two doctors have conducted a detailed enquiry and submitted a report. The enquiry committee, by the very nature of things, is only a fact-finding body. It is appointed for the purpose of the employer to see if the allegations against the employee have been made out.

¶38

Mr.S.Sivakumar points out that the 7^th respondent did not treat the petitioner in a proper manner. In case the petitioner has been abused, the solution is to approach the civil court seeking for damages or approach the consumer court stating that there was a deficiency in service at the hands of Arumanai Government Hospital. An enquiry report neither affects the rights of the petitioner nor does it take away any vested right from his hands.

¶39

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

¶40

4/6

¶41

W.P(MD)No.5681 of 2025

¶42

As stated above, it is only a fact-finding body. Hence, this writ

¶43

petition challenging the enquiry report is not maintainable. Leaving it open to the petitioner to approach the forum that can grant any relief as against the hospital and the 7^th respondent, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶44

04.03.2025

¶45

NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet:Yes skn To

¶46

1.The Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

¶47

2.The Director, Directorate of Medical and Rural Health Services in Tamil Nadu, DMS Campus, Teynempet, Chennai.

¶48

3.The District Collector, Kanyakumari District, At Nagercoil.

¶49

4.The Joint Director, Medical, Rural Health Services, Nagercoil- 629 002. Kanyakumari District.