T.Padmanaban v. Managing Director
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.06.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY Writ Petition No.13754 of 2024 T.Padmanaban ... Petitioner Vs.
1. Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupuram) Limited, No.3/137, Imayam Street, Salamedu, Villupuram - 605 602.
2. General Manager, Kancheepuram Division, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupuram) Limited, No.3/137, Imayam Street, Salamedu, Villupuram - 605 602.
3. The Branch Manager, Tiruvallur Bus Depot, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupuram) Limited, Tiruvallur - 602 001.
... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st and 3rd respondents to provide duty to the petitioner within any reasonable time. For Petitioner :
Mr.S.R.Karthikeyan For Respondents :
Mr.R.Venkatesa Perumal Standing Counsel, TNSTC, Villupuram.
1/5
*****
ORDER
This writ petition is filed seeking for a writ of mandamus directing the 1st and 3rd respondents to provide duty to the petitioner within any reasonable time.
2. The petitioner is working as a driver in the respondent Corporation. It is seen that he was absent from duty on certain days and therefore, disciplinary proceedings are being proceeded against him for the unauthorized absence. The petitioner was directed to produce certain documents and he made a representation on 03.04.2024 with all the said documents. However, he is not permitted to join duty.
3. When the matter came up for hearing, the same was passed over for the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation to get instructions.
4. On instructions, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation submitted that the disciplinary enquiry against the petitioner is progressing. In spite of specific direction, the petitioner has only produced the fitness certificate and not the other documents. 2/5
5. Be that as it may, it is now clear that the petitioner was employed by the respondent Corporation in the post of Driver and as on date he is not attained the age of superannuation. Therefore, there is no justification whatsoever on the part of the respondent Corporation in not providing duty to the petitioner. Since the petitioner is a Driver, of-course the respondent Corporation would be concerned with his physical fitness and the petitioner has provided the fitness certificate.
6. In view thereof, this writ petition is disposed of on the following terms:
1. The respondent Corporation shall be at liberty to pursue with the disciplinary proceedings in accordance with law.
2. In the meanwhile, the petitioner cannot be denied duty and the respondent Corporation is directed to provide duty to the petitioner and it would be open for the respondent Corporation to test the fitness of the petitioner to join duty as a Driver. Even if the petitioner is not medically fit for the post of Driver, he has to be provided with the lighter duty and hence, totally not providing any duty to the petitioner is not justifiable.
3. It is also stated that the petitioner has submitted all the medical 3/5
records. Even if the same has not been produced, the petitioner is directed to once again produce all the copies of the medical records for the purpose of providing duty.
4. No costs.
04.06.2024 mp Note: Issue order copy by 06.06.2024 To
1. Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupuram) Limited, No.3/137, Imayam Street, Salamedu, Villupuram - 605 602.
2. General Manager, Kancheepuram Division, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupuram) Limited, No.3/137, Imayam Street, Salamedu, Villupuram - 605 602.
3. The Branch Manager, Tiruvallur Bus Depot, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Villupuram) Limited, Tiruvallur - 602 001.
4/5
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
mp 04.06.2024 5/5