S.Irulappan v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 24.02.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V. KARTHIKEYAN S. Irulappan ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Arani Division Thiruvannamalai District.

2. The Tahsildar, Polur Taluk, Thiruvannamalai District.

3. Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Thiruvannamalai. .... Respondents Prayer :- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of mandamus to direct the 1st respondent to pass orders on the representation dated 07.10.2024 revoking the suspension order in R.C.No.A3/458/2024 dated 07.02.2024 within a stipulated period.

For Petitioner : Ms.Kanimozhi Sundar For Respondents : Mr.M.Shah Jahan Special Government Pleader 1/5

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the 1st respondent to pass orders on the representation dated 07.10.2024 revoking the suspension order in R.C.No.A3/458/2024 dated 07.02.2024.

2. The petitioner had been appointed as Village Administrative Officer in the year 2015 and was serving at Polur in Arani in Tiruvannamalai district. It is stated that the petitioner had demanded and accepted bribe amount of Rs.40,000/- and an FIR in Crime No.1 of 2024 had been registered by the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Department at Tiruvannamalai. Subsequent to trap proceedings, the petitioner had been arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 04.02.2024. He was released on bail on 19.02.2024. Investigation is still pending. The petitioner had been placed under suspension by order dated 07.02.2024. The petitioner had filed earlier writ petition in W.P.No.20725 of 2024 seeking the very same relief to revoke the suspension. A learned single 2/5

Judge of this Court by order dated 24.07.2024 had observed that it was not possible since the investigation is not yet completed. The investigation is still not completed. The respondents have a right to investigate in an appropriate manner and ensure that the charges are proved before the competent Criminal Court.

3. Taking into consideration the seriousness of the charge against the petitioner, though the learned counsel for the petitioner proclaims that the petitioner is innocent either of demand or acceptance of bribe money, still unless the investigation is completed, the order of suspension cannot be interfered with by this Court. The writ petition stands dismissed giving liberty to the petitioner to approach again after the final report is filed in the criminal case. No costs.

24.02.2025 dpq Index: Yes/No Speaking order / Non speaking order 3/5

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

dpq To

1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Arani Division Thiruvannamalai District.

2. The Tahsildar, Polur Taluk, Thiruvannamalai District.

3. Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Thiruvannamalai.

24.02.2025 4/5

5/5