M.Murthy v. The District Collector/

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.11.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN M.Murthy : Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, Inspector of Panchayats, Salem District, Salem.

2.The Personal Assistant to District Collector, Development, Salem District, Salem.

3.The Block Development Officer, Village Panchayat, Panamarathupatti Panchayat Union, Panamarathupatti, Salem District.

: Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of impugned order dated 15.03.2024 in Che.Mu.Aa No.26907/2017/Thi3 passed by the first respondent against the same, and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into service as Panchayat Secretary with all service and attendant benefits.

1/5

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Elayathamizhan For Respondents : Mr.V.Jeevagiridharan Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 15.03.2024 on the file of the first respondent thereby rejected the request made by the petitioner seeking revocation of the order of suspension dated 10.08.2017.

2. The petitioner was working as a Panchayat Secretary, the petitioner committed misappropriation of the panchayat funds to the tune of more than Rs.4 Lakhs. Therefore, FIR has been registered as against the petitioner in Crime No.14 of 2017 for the offences punishable under Sections 468, 471 and 420 on the file of the Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Salem. Pursuant to the registration of the FIR, the petitioner was arrested and remanded into judicial custody. While pending investigation, the petitioner was also issued with charge memo. However, no disciplinary proceedings was initiated and the criminal case is also pending for investigation. Therefore, the petitioner approached this Court seeking revocation of the order of suspension. This Court directed the respondent to consider the request made by the petitioner for revocation of suspension order. But the first respondent rejected the request made by the petitioner by order dated 15.03.2024 2/5

since the petitioner is not coming under the purview of G.O.(Ms).No.81, Human Resources Management (N) Department dated 04.08.2022. Further, he is not entitled for any subsistence allowance during the suspension period.

3. Since the petitioner has committed very serious offence as against the panchayat, the order of suspension cannot be revoked and the request made by the petitioner was rightly rejected by the first respondent. Hence this Courts finds no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the first respondent. Therefore, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, the respondents are directed to complete the disciplinary proceedings as against the petitioner and pass orders within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, W.M.P.Nos.33596 of 2024 is closed. 25.11.2025 Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order mrn 3/5

To 1.The District Collector, Inspector of Panchayats, Salem District, Salem.

2.The Personal Assistant to District Collector, Development, Salem District, Salem.

3.The Block Development Officer, Village Panchayat, Panamarathupatti Panchayat Union, Panamarathupatti, Salem District.

4/5

G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN , J.

(mrn) 25.10.2025 5/5