P.Karthikeyan v. The Chairman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 14.12.2018
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE Dr. JUSTICE S.VIMALA Writ Petition No.15126 of 2018 & WMP No.17886 of 2018 P.Karthikeyan ... Petitioner ..vs..
1. The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd. (TANGEDCO), NPKRR Maaligai, 144 Annasalai, Chennai 600 002
2. The Superintending Engineer, Mettur Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd. (TANGEDCO), Mettur Dam 636 401 ... Respondents Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the second respondent in Memo No.385/Adm.2/A.3/F.Suspension/2016, dated 21.07.2016, to quash the same and to permit the petitioner to join duty / service as Assistant Engineer with all attendant / consequential benefits.
For Petitioner : Mr. Vijayan Subramanian For Respondents : Mr. P.R.Dhilipkumar,Standing Counsel. - - -
O R D E R
Invoking the provisions of sub-regulation (a) of Regulation 9 of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Employees (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, the petitioner-P.Karthikeyan, who is the Assistant Engineer was placed under suspension, until further orders by the order of the second respondent, dated 21.07.2016. 1.1. The order of suspension reads that a criminal case is pending against the petitioner herein under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. 1.2. Seeking revocation of suspension contending that the suspension is a prolonged one, this writ petition has been filed.
2. Heard both sides.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that prolonged suspension is illegal and therefore, the suspension must be revoked; it is also stated that charge sheet is filed and the trial is yet to commence.
4. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents was heard on the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
5. It is not known when the trial will commence and when it will end. A perusal of the materials available on record would disclose that no order has been passed reviewing the order of suspension periodically. There is no order justifying the extension of suspension, after three months, as contemplated in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary v. Union of India (2015) 7 SCC 291.
6. It is possible to protect the interest of the respondents also by posting the petitioner in a nonsensitive post or by transferring him to any other department or by imposing any appropriate conditions, if in case the order of suspension is ordered to be revoked, as held in Ajay Kumar's case, cited supra.
7. Under such circumstances, the respondents are directed to revoke the order of suspension passed against the petitioner by imposing appropriate conditions and by posting him in any non-sensitive post. Such an order shall be passed by the respondents forthwith, not later than two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, the connected WMP is closed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar srk To
1. The Chairman, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd. (TANGEDCO), NPKRR Maaligai, 144 Annasalai, Chennai 600 002
2. The Superintending Engineer, Mettur Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd. (TANGEDCO), Mettur Dam 636 401 +1cc to Mr.a.Jenaseanan, Advocate SR.No. 87112 +1cc to Mr. P.R.Dhilipkumar, Advocate SR.No. 87766 Writ Petition No.15126 of 2018 & WMP No.17886 of 2018 A.SK(11/01/2019)