Madras High CourtWP(MD)/7675/2021disposed of

Selvam.S v. The Managing Director

2022-01-04Honourable Mr Justice B.Pugalendhi3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 04.01.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI and W.MP(MD)No.5829 of 2021 S.Selvam ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Government Transport Corporation, Tiruneleli Limit, KTC Nagar, Tirunelveli District.

2.The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Government Transport Corporation, Tirunelveli Limit, Ranithottam, Nagercoil Region, Kanyakumari District.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the first respondent in File No.809/Sa4/Tha.Aa.Po.Ka/Thi.Li/2012, dated 30.09.2020 and quash the same as illegal and consequently to direct the respondents to provide all the attendant monetary benefits attached with the service of the petitioner.

For Petitioner : Mr.C.M.Arumugam For Respondents : Mr.R.Rajamohan

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed as against the order dated 30.09.2020. The first respondent vide impugned order has dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner, challenging the punishment of increment cut with cumulative effect for three years. 2.The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is working as a Driver in the respondent corporation. On 16.03.201 while he was plying stage carrier on Tirunelveli Highways, a person who came in a two wheeler, bearing registration No.TN 72 N 8241 caused an accident by dashing against the stage carrier, sustained injury and subsequently died in the hospital. For this incident, departmental proceedings were initiated against the petitioner and in conclusion of the same, he was imposed with a 1/3

punishment of increment cut with cumulative effect for three years. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner preferred an appeal on 10.12.2018 before the first respondent the Managing Director. In the meantime a criminal case was registered against the petitioner in Crime No.49 of 2012 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Airvadi, which ended in acquittal. Since no order was passed in the appeal the petitioner had preferred a writ petition before this Court in W.P(MD)No.820 of 2020, wherein this Court directed the first respondent to dispose of the appeal within a period three months. However, the first respondent has not passed any orders on the appeal. Hence, the petitioner filed a contempt petition before this Court in Cont.P(MD)No.993 of 2020. Thereafter, the first respondent disposed of the appeal by modifying the punishment to two years increment cut with cumulative effect. Aggrieved over the same, the present writ petition is filed.

3.The learned Counsel for the petitioner by referring clause 61 of the settlement under Section 12(3) of the ID Act submits that if the departmental proceedings are initiated based on a criminal case and if the criminal case ends in acquittal or is dropped by the Police concerned, disciplinary authority may revise the punishment. However, without considering the same, impugned order came to be passed.

4.Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent corporation submits that clause 61 of the Settlement under Section 12(3) of the ID Act is not applicable to the petitioner, who is working as a Driver. Further the language used in the 12(3) settlement is 'may', therefore, the discretion is vested with the disciplinary authority, who has taken a right decision and imposed a punishment.

5.This Court paid its anxious consideration to the rival submissions and perused the materials placed on record. 6.The petitioner, who is a Driver in the respondent Corporation has been imposed with a punishment of increment cut for three years with cumulative effect. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed an appeal before the first respondent, who has after a direction from this Court in W.P(MD)No.820 of 2020, dated 13.01.2020, modified the punishment vide the impugned order dated 30.09.2020, for increment cut for two years with cumulative effect. The criminal case registered against the petitioner in Crime No.49 of 2012 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Airvadi, ended in acquittal. Moreover, as per clause 61 of the settlement under Section 12(3) of the ID Act, if the departmental proceedings are initiated based on a criminal case and if the criminal case ends in acquittal or is dropped by the Police concerned, disciplinary authority may revise the punishment.

2/3

7.In the light of the above, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the first respondent, the Managing Director, who shall consider the case of the petitioner in the light of the 12(3) Settlement and pass orders afresh on its own merits and in accordance with law.

8.In fine, the writ petition is disposed of on the above terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-III) // True Copy // / /2022 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) dsk Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy,shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned. To 1.The Managing Director, Tamil Nadu State Government Transport Corporation, Tiruneleli Limit, KTC Nagar, Tirunelveli District.

2.The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Government Transport Corporation, Tirunelveli Limit, Ranithottam, Nagercoil Region, Kanyakumari District.

+1 CC to M/s.R.RAJAMOHAN, Advocate ( SR-315[F] dated 05/01/2022 ) +1 CC to M/s.C.M.ARUMUGAM, Advocate ( SR-488[F] dated 05/01/2022 ) 04.01.2022 (CO) AP(26.02.2022) 3P 5C 3/3