K.Chandra v. The Director

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 01.04.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND and W.M.P(MD)Nos.6614 to 6616 of 2025 K.Chandra ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Director, Agriculture Department, Chepauk, Chennai 5 2.The Commissioner, Agriculture Marketing and Agri Business, Chippet Road, Guindy, Chennai 32.

3.The Deputy Director of Agriculture, Agri Business, Royanur, Karur, Karur District.

4.The Superintendent, Office of Deputy Director of Agriculture, Agri Business, Royanur, Karur, Karur District.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for 1/6

issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the Charge Memo bearing Letter No.PAONa.1/32997/2024, dated 20.02.2025 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same and further direct the second respondent to include the petitioner's name in the panel of promotees for post of Assistant for the year 2023-2024.

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Kannan For Respondents : Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed against the charge memo, dated 20.02.2025 and consequently direct the second respondent to include the petitioner's name in the panel of promotees for post of Assistant for the year 2023-2024.

2. The petitioner is working as a Typist in the office of the third respondent herein. The charge memo was issued against her by the second respondent under Rule 17 (b) of Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules on 20.02.2025. The petitioner submitted her explanation on 11.03.2025. Despite the same, due to the deliberate action in trying to frame her on cooked up charges, she is facing possibility of losing any prospective 2/6

promotion that would be given to her on completion of five years of service of typist. She filed this writ petition against the charge memo.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge memo issued by the second respondent against the principles of law and equity and it violates the procedure established under law for consideration and framing of charges without proper enquiry. He further contends that the allegations and findings against the petitioner are baseless, illegal and untenable in law and as such, it has to be quashed.

4. On the other hand, the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents submits that once the petitioner submitted her explanation to the charge memo to the charges levelled against her, she is not entitled to file this writ petition. He further submits that this writ petition can be disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to conclude the disciplinary proceedings at an earlier date.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents and perused the materials available on record.

3/6

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds sufficient force in the submission of the learned Additional Government Pleader. Admittedly, the charge memo was issued to the petitioner and she submitted an explanation to the charges levelled against her and at that stage filing this writ petition challenging the charge memo is unreasonable and not maintainable. The petitioner has to participate in the disciplinary proceeding and put forth her case. At this stage, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the charge memo issued against the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to conclude the disciplinary proceedings by following due process of law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

No costs.

Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 01.04.2025 NCC:yes/no Index:yes/no Internet:yes/no Sn 4/6

To:

1.The Director, Agriculture Department, Chepauk, Chennai 5 2.The Commissioner, Agriculture Marketing and Agri Business, Chippet Road, Guindy, Chennai 32.

3.The Deputy Director of Agriculture, Agri Business, Royanur, Karur, Karur District.

4.The Superintendent, Office of Deputy Director of Agriculture, Agri Business, Royanur, Karur, Karur District.

5/6

BATTU DEVANAND , J.

Sn 01.04.2025 6/6