K.Kuppan v. The Principal Chief

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.11.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR W.P.No.26988 of 2008 and M.P.No.2 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2009 K.Kuppan

...Petitioner

Vs.

The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Panagal Buildings, Chennai 600 015. ...Respondent Prayer :

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the Proc.No.B1/59698/08 dated 31.10.2008 issued by the Respondent to the limited extent of Non inclusion/Non selection of the name of the petitioner in the approved panel of eligible Forester fit for promotion as Forest Ranger for the year 2008-2009 and to consequently direct the Respondent to include the name of the petitioner in the above said panel in the appropriate place in accordance with the Seniority as maintained till date and to consequently promote him as Forest Ranger with retrospective effect from the date of promotion of his immediate junior with all consequential service and monetary benefits. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Balakrishnan for Mr.Ravi Priya For Respondent : Mr.T.Arunkumar, A.G.P.

O R D E R

The learned Additional Govt. Pleader appearing for the respondent would submit disciplinary proceedings had been initiated against the petitioner under Rule 17(b) of Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline & Appeal Rules) whereby charges proved and punishment also imposed against the petitioner. Appeal filed before the appellate authorities also dismissed on the ground of delay. Finally, the petitioner filed Review before https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

the Government and the same was also rejected by the Government vide G.O. (D) No.290 Environment and Forest Department, dated 29.8.2013 and the said order was also communicated to the petitioner. Copy of the said G.O. (D) No.290, dated 29.8.2013 produced before this Court. Therefore, according to the learned Additional Govt. Pleader appearing for the respondent, the petitioner is not eligible for promotion and consequently, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

2.In view of the punishment imposed against the petitioner for the charges under Rule 17(b) of Tamilnadu Civil Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, the appeal and Review filed by the petitioner was also rejected and therefore, petitioner cannot claim promotion and as such, there is no merit in the writ petition and the same is deserves to be dismissed.

3. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-IV) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar vaan To The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Panagal Buildings, Chennai 600 015.

+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.61528 +1cc to the Special Government Pleader,(Forest) S.R.No.61370 W.P.No.26835 of 2008 BP(CO) RGA(29/12/2021) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/