BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF THE MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11/07/2006 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI W.P.No.5584 of 2006 and M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2006 K.Sivaganasundaram ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The District Collector, Sivagangai. 2.The Director of Rural Development, Panagal Buildings, Saidapet, Chennai. 3.The State of Tamil Nadu, rep by the Secretary to Government, Rural Development Department. ... Respondents PRAYER Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for records on the file of the first respondent in his proceedings Na.Ka.No .P.3/11826/89-2, dated 27.06.1993 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to retire with all monetary and service benefits with 18% per annum. !For Petitioner ... Mr.J.Nishabanu ^For Respondents ... Mr.K.Bhaskaran. Additional Government Pleader :ORDER
Mr.K.Bhaskaran, learned Additional Government Pleader, takes notice on
behalf of the respondents.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the
learned Additional Government Pleader, appearing for the respondents. By consent
of both counsel, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal.
3. This writ petition is filed challenging the order of the first
respondent in his proceedings Na.Ka.P.3/11826/89-2, dated 27.06.1993, quash the
same and consequently, direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to retire
with all monetary and service benefits with 18% per annum.
4. The case of the petitioner is that while he was working as an Extension
Officer under the first respondent, certain charges were framed against the
petitioner on 27.06.1993. It is stated that even in the year 1988, similar
charges were framed against the petitioner and subsequently, the said charges
were cancelled by the Tribunal due to the approach of the petitioner. After
cancelling the charges, on 27.06.1993, fresh charges were framed against the
petitioner. The petitioner has filed a petition before the Tribunal and the
Tribunal has given a direction to the first respondent to complete the enquiry
and pass appropriate orders.
5. The grievance of the petitioner is that in spite of the direction of
the Tribunal, no order has been passed, which necessitated, the petitioner to
file another petition before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal since the
respondent concerned has not implemented the order passed by the Tribunal.
6. The further case of the petitioner is that in the meantime, a criminal
case in C.C.No.426 of 2004, has been foisted against him on the same set of
charges and therefore, there is a change in circumstance.
7. In view of the same, the petitioner has filed a Writ Petition and on
the basis of an order passed, the petitioner has been acquitted from the
criminal case, and, therefore, the charges framed against him has to be set
aside. When the petitioner has already approached the Tribunal and the same is
pending before the Tribunal, I do not want to interfere with the charges framed
against the petitioner.
8. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in respect of
the change in circumstances, the petitioner has made a representation to the
third respondent on 01.05.2006, and the petitioner will be satisfied, if a
direction is given to the third respondent to consider the representation of the
petitioner dated 01.05.2006, and pass appropriate orders.
9. In view of the same, the third respondent is directed to consider the
representation of the petitioner dated 01.05.2006, and pass appropriate orders,
and also direct the respondent concerned to complete the enquiry, in view of the
change in circumstances, which has also been stated in the representation of the
petitioner dated 01.05.2006, within a period of eight weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order.
10. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of.
Consequently, the connected M.Ps are closed. No costs.
nb
To
1.The District Collector,
Sivagangai.
2.The Director of Rural Development,
Panagal Buildings,
Saidapet, Chennai.
3.The State of Tamil Nadu,
rep by the Secretary to Government,
Rural Development Department.
