R.Vibushanan v. The Dist Collector

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29.3.2023

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI R.Vibushanan ...

Appellant/Petitioner Vs.

1. The District Collector, Tiruvallur District, Tiruvallur.

2. The District Revenue Officer, Tiruvallur District, Tiruvallur.

...

Respondents/Respondents Writ Appeal filed under Section 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the order passed in W.P.No.16817 of 2019 dated 4.09.2019 on the file of this Court. For Appellant : Mr.K.Ravi Anantha Padmanaban For Respondents : Mr.P.Anandakumar *****

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was made by D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.) The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition challenging the impugned order dated 20.12.2010 of the second respondent suspending the 1/4

petitioner with effect from 16.12.2010 on account of his having involved in Crime No.3/AC/2010/CC-III dated 16.12.2010 of the Vigilance and AntiCorruption under Sec.7 of Prevention of Corruption Act and consequently, direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner as an Assistant in any non sensitive post in the Revenue Department. The prayer as sought for in the writ petition was rejected by the Writ Court. Aggrieved by the same, the writ petitioner has filed the instant appeal before this Court.

2. A trap case was registered as against the appellant and charge sheet was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate cum Special Judge, Thiruvallur and the same was taken on file on 14.3.2012 in Spl.C.C.No.8 of 2012. By judgment dated 16.3.2023, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate cum Special Judge, Thiruvallur has convicted the appellant and imposed a punishment of 4 years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.20,000/- for the offences under Sec.7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 in default 3 months simple imprisonment and 4 years rigorous imprisonment and fined Rs.20,000/- in default 3 months simple imprisonment for the offences under Sec.13(1) (d) r/w 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and ordered sentences may run concurrently. According to the respondent, in the light of adverse judgment rendered as against the appellant/petitioner, appropriate action will be initiated as against the appellant/petitioner. 2/4

3. In the light of adverse judgment rendered as against the petitioner cited supra, the writ appeal is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ appeal stands dismissed. No costs. However, it is always open to the appellant to prefer an appeal before the appellate authority as against the said judgment. Liberty is granted to the appellant to approach the authorities concerned for payment of subsistence allowance, if not already paid. (D.K.K.J. ) (K.G.T.J.) 29.3.2023 Speaking/Non Speaking order Index: Yes vaan To

1. The District Collector, Tiruvallur District, Tiruvallur.

2. The District Revenue Officer, Tiruvallur District, Tiruvallur. 3/4

D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J AND K.GOVINDARAJAN THILAKAVADI, J.

Dated: 29.3.2023 4/4