G.Geetharani, v. The Superintendent Of Police,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF MADRAS
DATED: 10.01.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH W.P.No.28167 of 2017 and W.M.P.No.30302 of 2017 G.Geetharani ... Petitioner Vs
1. The Superintendent of Police, Villupuram District, Villupuram.
2. The Director General of Police, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai-4.
... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the 1st respondent in connection with the impugned order passed by him in his Ref.H2/PR94/2011 dated 29.08.2012 and modified by the 2nd respondent in RC No.46486/AP2(2)/2014 dated 07.04.2016 and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.K.Venkataramani Senior Counsel for Mr.M.Muthappan For Respondents: Mr.C.Selvaraj Additional Government Pleader
O R D E R
With the consent of both the parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal.
2.As against the charge of belatedly handling over the small service book and medical history book at the reporting new station, the petitioner was subjected to departmental action under Rule 3 (b) of the Tamilnadu Police Subordinate Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955 and the Disciplinary Duthority had awarded the punishment of stoppage of increment for a period of three years with cumulative effect on 29.08.2012. On appeal, the second respondent herein had modified the punishment into one of "Postponement of her next increment for a period of three years without cumulative
effect which shall not affect her future increments". Challenging the modified punishment, the present Writ Petition is filed.
3. At the outset, this Court does not intent to remark on the order of the Director General of Police had, who, while taking into account the monetary implications and the effect of punishment that would affect the junior level employee had taken a lenient view and accordingly modified the punishment, which may not in normal circumstance require the interference.
4. However, the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner drew attention of this Court to the various grounds raised by the petitioner in her appeal petition dated 20.01.2016 and submitted that some of the relevant grounds had not been considered by the Appellate Authority and if the same had been considered, there was a possibility that the petitioner could have been exonerated from the charges. By stating that the petitioner was a junior level employee, who would now lose her promotion over a period of four years, made an earnest request to interfere with the punishment.
5. This Court is of the view that non-consideration of the grounds raised by the petitioner may not require interference with the punishment as such. However, if the Appellate Authority is called upon to re-consider the appeal grounds and then take a final decision, the ends of justice could be secured.
6. As already pointed out, this Court does not strictly find any fault with the modified punishment imposed by the Appellate Authority and therefore, while re-considering the petitioner's appeal grounds again, the second respondent shall endeavour not to enhance the punishment while passing fresh orders.
7. In the light of the above observations, the impugned order of the second respondent dated 07.04.2016, is ordered to be kept in abeyance and the matter is remanded back to the second respondent for fresh consideration of the grounds raised by the petitioner in her appeal petition dated 20.01.2016, till final orders are passed on the same. The second respondent shall call upon to pass such final orders atleast within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner is also at liberty to raise additional grounds before the second respondent, if she chooses to do so. The fresh order to be passed by the second respondent, shall supersede the earlier order of punishment dated 07.04.2016.
8.This Writ Petition stands ordered accordingly. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar anu/rst To
1. The Superintendent of Police, Villupuram District, Villupuram.
2. The Director General of Police, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai-4.
+1 cc to Mr.M.Muthappan , Advocate Sr.NO. 2184 +1 cc to Government Pleader Sr.NO. 2242 W.P.No.28167 of 2017 and W.M.P.No.30302 of 2017 MT(CO) A.SK(01.02.2022)