V.Sundararajan Vs The Additional Chief Secretary

Prayer: This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records relating to the second respondent vide proceeding No.Na.Ka.A1/10067/2017 dated 01.08.2023 and to quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to include the name of the petitioner in the panel of Deputy Collectors drawn for the year 2019-2020.

¶15

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.V.Jayaprakash Narayanan for Mr.K.Pandian For Respondent(s) : Mr.R.U.Dinesh Rajkumar, Additional Government Pleader

¶16

__________ Page1 of 6

¶17

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

¶18

WP No. 15433 of 2026

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The petition has been filed to quash the proceedings of the second respondent vide proceeding No.Na.Ka.A1/10067/2017 dated 01.08.2023 and to consequently direct the respondents to include the name of the petitioner in the panel of Deputy Collectors drawn for the year 2019-2020.

¶21

The petitioner joined as Junior Assistant on 12.05.1994 on

¶22

compassionate ground, on account of the death of his father in the Government Service and he was appointed to Taluk Office, Vanur, and after rendering 5 years of unblemished service, he was promoted to various posts and served various places. At present, the petitioner is serving as Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Nandanam, Chennai – 35. Thereafter, the petitioner served as Special Tahsildar, Social Security Scheme, Villupuram Taluk during the period from 11.06.2015 to 16.02.2016. The Government of Tamil Nadu issued Government Order dated 17.04.2015, to cater the needs of poor people to get the benefits of various schemes. In terms of the said G.O’s, the applications would be received from respective categories claiming pension and other benefits and forwarded to field officials of the village concerned to ascertain the genuineness of the claim. Pursuant thereof, the payments would be made to the beneficiaries on every succeeding month. However, to the shock and surmise of the petitioner, he had received a charge memo dated 02.08.2017,

¶23

Page2 of 6

¶24

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

¶25

WP No. 15433 of 2026

¶26

alleging serious misconduct under Rule 17[b] of the TNCS [D & A] Rules.

¶27

2.1.Seeking the documents relied upon in the charge memo, the petitioner

¶28

sent a letter to the respondents, however, the said letter was sent to the disciplinary authority on 24.08.2017. Aggrieved by the inaction on the part of

¶29

the respondents, the petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court in W.P.No.1486 of 2018 to quash the charge memo issued by the respondents, wherein this Court vide order dated 06.02.2019 directed the authorities to initiate departmental proceedings in the manner known to law. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner preferred a writ appeal before this Court in W.A.No.1845 of 2019 and in pursuance thereof, the documents relied upon by the second respondent were furnished to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the inordinate delay in disposing of the disciplinary proceedings, the petitioner moved another writ petition in W.P.No.738 of 2022, pursuant to the order dated 07.12.2022 passed by this Court, the second respondent issued memos dated 12.12.2022 and 29.12.2022 enclosing the report of the enquiry officer and sought for further explanations. Though the charges have been framed against the petitioner in the charge memo dated 02.08.2017, the same have not been proved. Subsequently, disciplinary authority imposed a penalty of stoppage of increment for a period of three years with cumulative effect vide proceedings in Na.Ka.No.A1/10067/2017 dated 01.08.2023. Challenging the order of punishment, the petitioner preferred an appeal on 23.10.2023 before the first

¶30

Page3 of 6

¶31

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

¶32

WP No. 15433 of 2026

¶33

respondent. However, the same has not been concluded till date. Hence, the petitioner is before this Court seeking the aforesaid relief.

¶34

Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

¶35

Admittedly, the petitioner has preferred an appeal as early as on 23.10.2023, however, till date the appeal has not been heard. Though the writ petition has been filed seeking to quash the order dated 01.08.2023, considering the fact that the petitioner has preferred the appeal against the very same order and the same is pending since 23.10.2023, this Court issues a direction to the first respondent to dispose of the appeal filed by the petitioner after affording an opportunity of hearing to him and aggrieved persons if any, within a period of six (6) weeks from today.

¶36

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions stand closed.

¶37

27-04-2026

¶38

Note of Office: Issue Order Copy on 28.04.2026

¶39

Index: Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶40

rap

¶41

Page4 of 6