IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 06.10.2009 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH W.P.No.7126 of 2009 and M.P.No.1 of 2009 R. Sampath .... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Collector The Collector's office Kancheepuram district, Kancheepuram. 2.The Personal Assistant to Collector (General), Kancheepuram district, Kancheepuram. .... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of the writ of Certiorarified Mandamus in calling for all the connected records pertaining to the passing of the order dated 01.09.2006 in proceedings No.R.C.41620/2006/A3 on the file of The Personal Assistant to Collector. For Petitioner : M/s. G. Justin For Respondent : Mr. P. Muthukumar O R D E R
The petitioner herein was working as a record clerk and while he was working in the said capacity, an order of suspension has been passed on 01.09.2006 by the second respondent exercising the power under Rule 17 (e) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. Thereafter, the petitioner was paid the suspension allowance as per fundamental Rule 53(1).
2. In pursuant to the said suspension order, an enquiry was initiated and the said enquiry conducted by the Commissioner of Civil Proceedings is in progress. In fact, all the witnesses have been examined and the matter is posted for examination of the Investigation Officer.
3. Inasmuch as the suspension having been passed as early as on 01.09.2006 and no final decision has been taken so far,this Court is of the considered opinion that the second respondent will have to be directed to review the order of suspension by taking into consideration of the fact that the suspension order having been imposed from 01.09.2006 and the petitioner has been receiving 75% of the salary even without working. The second respondent is directed to consider the revocation of suspension order and also he is further directed to consider the posting of the petitioner in some other place, if the order of suspension is revoked. The petitioner has already given a representation on 12.06.2008 and the same is pending consideration with the second respondent. The second respondent should pass orders on the said representation within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order. The second respondent is also directed to consider the fact that the two other officers, who are identically placed to the petitioner, namely Mr. T.Krishna Moorthy and Mr. V.Ravi Kumar have not been placed under suspension.
4. With this observation, the writ petition is disposed of. No Costs. Consequently, connected M.P. is closed.
06.10.2009
Index: Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
prm
To The Personal Assistant to Collector,
M.M.SUNDRESH, J.
prm
W.P.No.7126 of 2009 and
M.P.No.1 of 2009
06.10.2009