D.Ramesh v. The Commissioner,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 03.07.2017

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.Nos.9331 of 2017 and W.M.P.Nos.10306 & 10307 of 2017 D.Ramesh .. Petitioner

Versus

1. The Commissioner Municipal Administration, Chepauk, Chennai - 5.

2. The Commissioner, Panruti Municipality, Cuddalore District.

.. Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorari and to call for the records of the first respondent in D.O.No.7527/2017/C1 dated 31.03.2017 and the consequential order of cancellation of the petitioner's promotion passed by the second respondent in Na.Ka.No. 2901/2016/C1 dated 04.04.2017 and quash the same. For Petitioner :

Mr.M.S.Palaniswamy For Respondents :

Mr.S.Gunasekaran Addl. Government Pleader for R1 Mr.P.V.Selvakumar Addl. Government Pleader for R2

O R D E R

This writ petition is filed challenging the order of reversion of the writ petitioner from the post of Driver to the post of Sanitary Worker.

2. The writ petitioner was appointed as Sanitary Worker and by virtue of the length of service, he was promoted to the post of Driver and joined in the post. The short ground advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the

impugned order of reversion was issued without issuing any notice to the writ petitioner and therefore the impugned order is in violation of the principles of natural justice. The legal principle is that no employee can be reverted without providing an opportunity of submitting his explanation / objection. On the ground of violation of the principle of natural justice, this writ petition is filed.

3. Mr.P.V.Selvakumar, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the second respondent has filed a counter affidavit, in which it is also not substantiated by the respondent that an opportunity was given to the writ petitioner before issuing the order of reversion. At this stage, it may not be required for this Court to adjudicate the merits and demerits of the respective pleadings, since the basic legal principle of an opportunity was not provided to the petitioner.

4. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to consider the ground raised by learned counsel for the petitioner regarding the violation of the principles of natural justice.

5. With this observation, the impugned order of reversion is quashed and writ petition stands allowed. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.

6. However, it is left open for the respondents to reopen the case by issuing fresh notice and after providing all reasonable opportunity and after getting explanation from the writ petitioner, they can proceed with the matter for passing orders in this regard.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS VII) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar at/dpq

To

1. The Commissioner Municipal Administration, Chepauk, Chennai - 5.

2. The Commissioner, Panruti Municipality, Cuddalore District.

+1 cc to Government Pleader sr 46559 +1 cc to Mr.M.S.Palaniswamy Advocate sr46407 W.P.No.9331 of 2017 and W.M.P.Nos.10306 & 10307 of 2017 rv(co) aa13/07/2017