T.Venkatesan Vs Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation

The Senior Regional Manager Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation, Chennai Region-II, 4th Floor, L.L.A. Building, No.735, Anna Salai, Chennai- 600 002.

¶12

The District Manager ,(Thiruvallur West), Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation, G-29 and 30, Industrial Estate, SIDCO Road, Kakkalur, Thiruvallur District -602 003.

¶13

..Respondent(s)

¶14

PRAYER : Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the entire records pertaining to the order in Ref. Na.Ka. No.A4/ 3844/ 2010 dated 17.08.2024 passed by the 3rd respondent and to quash the same as illegal ultra-

¶15

Page1 of 7

¶16

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

¶17

WP No. 18842 of 2026

¶18

virus and thereby directing the respondent to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of services, back wages with all other attendant benefits taking into account of the acquittal in C.C.No.12 of 2012 dated 12.02.2019 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Poonamallee, Tiruvallur District as claimed by the petitioner representation dated 27.10.2025 in a time bound period.

¶19

For Petitioner(s): Mrs.U.Santhana Lakshmi For Respondent(s): Mr.K.Balakrishnan, Standing Counsel

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The writ petition is filed for the relief set out below:

¶22

"calling for the entire records pertaining to the order in Ref. Na.Ka. No.A4/ 3844/ 2010 dated 17.08.2024 passed by the 3rd respondent and to quash the same as illegal ultra- virus and thereby directing the respondent to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of services, back wages with all other attendant benefits taking into account of the acquittal in C.C.No.12 of 2012 dated 12.02.2019 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Poonamallee, Tiruvallur District as claimed by the petitioner representation dated 27.10.2025 in a time bound period."

¶23

It is the case of the petitioner that he was working in the Shop

¶24

which is functioning under the control of the third respondent. While so, the third respondent vide order dated 29.12.2010, removed him from service with effect from 30.12.2010 due to alleged cash shortage of Rs.7,08,000/- in the Shop No.8896 where the petitioner was working. Later, the petitioner was acquitted by the Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Poonamallee, by an order dated 12.02.2019. Thereafter, instead of reinstating the petitioner, the third respondent

¶25

Page2 of 7

¶26

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

¶27

WP No. 18842 of 2026

¶28

by an order dated 29.11.2021 has ordered for enquiry and called upon the petitioner to attend the enquiry for the very same charge. Therefore, the petitioner filed a writ petition in W.P.No.987 of 2022 before this Court. This Court, by an order dated 29.01.2024, directed the respondents to proceed with the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner after serving a charge memo and in accordance with law.

¶29

Thereafter, the third respondent issued a charge memo dated 24.06.2024, for which, the petitioner had sent a reply dated 08.07.2024. Without appointing enquiry officer, the third respondent passed the impugned order dated 17.08.2024. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner is before this Court.

¶30

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

¶31

The petitioner has challenged the rejection of his request seeking to reinstate him with continuity of services, backwages with all attendant benefits on account of his acquittal in C.C.No.12 of 2012 dated 12.02.2019 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Poonamallee, Tiruvallur District. The disciplinary proceedings were directed to be proceeded against the petitioner after serving him with a charge memo by orders of this Court in writ petition in W.P.No.987 of 2022 dated 29.01.2024. The petitioner has been dismissed on

¶32

Page3 of 7

¶33

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

¶34

WP No. 18842 of 2026

¶35

account of cash shortage of a sum of Rs.7,08,000/- at Shop No.8896. The genesis for the dismissal is this allegation. The criminal proceedings in C.C.No.12 of 2012 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.I,

¶36

Poonamallee, Tiruvallur District was initiated in respect of this charge. By an order dated 12.02.2019, the petitioner herein who was the first accused and four others were acquitted. The learned Judicial Magistrate had observed as follows:

¶37

“19/ g[yd; tprhuiz mjpfhup jdJ rhl;rpaj;jpy ; Ie;jhk; Fw;wthsp knfc&; fil vz ; 9185I jzpf;if bra;ag;gl;l fhykhd mf;nlhgh; khjk; KGtJk; ntiyf;F tuhky; kUj;J tpLg;gpy; ,Ue;jhh; vd;gij ehd; bjhpe;J bfhs;stpy;iy vd;W brhd;dhy ; rhpjhd ; vd;Wk ; ,t;tHf;fpy ; ehd;fhk ; Fw;wthsp gukrptk; ,t;tHf;fpy; rk;gt fhyj;jpw;F Kd;ng gzpapil ePf;fk; bra;ag;gl;oUe;jhh; vd;gJ vdf;F bjhpahJ vd;Wk; 05/08/2010 Kjy; 4k; vjphp r!;bgz;l; bra;agl;Ls;s tptuk; bjupa[kh vd;why; bjhpahJ vd;Wk; Twpa[s;s epiyapy; ,t;tHf;fpy; rk;gtk; ele;j fhyfl;lj;jpy ; 1 Kjy; 5 vjphpfs; nkw;go filfspy; gzpapy; ,Ue;jhh;fs; vd;gij fhl;l muR jug;gpy; Mtz';fs; VJk ; jhf;fy ; bra;ag;gltpy;iy/ ,t;tHf;fpy ; nkw;go filfspypUe;j fhyp ghl;oy;fs ; kw;Wk ; cile;j ghl;oy;fs; fzf;fplg;gltpy;iy vd;Wk ; FnlhdpypUe;J te;j ruf;Ffs; mDg;gg;gl;lJ vd;w tptuk ; Fwpj;Jk ; kw;Wk ; tpw;gidahd ruf;Ffs ; tptuk ; Fwpj;Jk;. ,Ug;g [ tptuk ; Fwpj;J bjspthd fzf;Ffs; muR jug;gpy; rkh;g;gpf;fgltpy;iy/ nkYk; m/j/rh/M/4 kw;Wk ; m/j/rh/M/5 Mfpa Ma;twpf;iffspd ; efy;fshd v/j/rh/M/1 kw;Wk; v/j/rh/M/2y; Misappropriation Nil vd;W Fwpg;gplg;gl;Ls;s epiyapy ; vjphpfSf;F vjpuhd muR jug;g[ epUgzk; bra;ag;gltpy;iy vd;W ,e;ePjpkd;wk; fUJfpwJ/”

¶38

__________ Page4 of 7

¶39

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

¶40

WP No. 18842 of 2026

¶41

6.

¶42

Therefore, there is a clear finding of a Court that the respondents

¶43

have not even proved that the petitioner and others had worked in the said shop. However, the impugned order does not refer to the above finding nor has any material been referred to which has prompted the third respondent to pass the impugned order. In fact, there is absolutely no discussion in this regard. The petitioner’s request has been rejected on the basis of one line non - speaking order which has been extracted herein below.

¶44

The aforesaid order cannot be sustained and therefore, the

¶45

impugned order stands quashed and the matter is remitted back to the respondents. The respondents shall consider the application afresh and shall take into consideration the judgment of the Criminal proceedings in C.C.No.12 of 2012 which has been referred supra and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, after providing an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶46

Page5 of 7

¶47

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

¶48

WP No. 18842 of 2026

¶49

With the above directions, this writ petition is allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition stands closed. No costs.

¶50

05-06-2026

¶51

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No ssa

¶52

To 1.Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation CMDA Tower- II, 4th Floor, Gandhi Irwin Bridge Road, Egmore, Chennai- 600 008.

¶53

2.The Senior Regional Manager Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation, Chennai Region-II, 4th Floor, L.L.A. Building, No.735, Anna Salai, Chennai- 600 002.

¶54

3.The District Manager ,(Thiruvallur West), Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation, G-29 and 30, Industrial Estate, SIDCO Road, Kakkalur, Thiruvallur District -602 003.

¶55

__________ Page6 of 7

¶56

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

WP No. 18842 of 2026

P.T.ASHA, J.

ssa

WP No. 18842 of 2026