Veerapandian R v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 07.04.2026

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR and W.M.P.(MD) No.7535 of 2026 R.Veerapandian ... Petitioner -vsThe District Collector Dindigul District Dindigul ... Respondent PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to defer the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner pending in Na.Ka.No.2052/2021/Voo.Va.9, dated 13.02.2026, on the file of the respondent, till the conclusion of criminal case in Special C.C.No.8 of 2025, on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate / Special Court for Prevention of Corruption Act Cases, Dindigul. For Petitioner :

Mr.T.Antony Arulraj For Respondent :

Mr.S.Shaji Bino Special Government Pleader

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to defer the disciplinary proceedings that are pending against the petitioner herein pursuant to the charge memo dated 16.08.2017 pending disposal of the criminal case registered against him in Spl.C.C.No.8 of 2015, on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate / Special Judge for Prevention of Corruption Act Cases, Dindigul.

2. As seen from the materials on record and as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the entire trial in the said Spl.C.C.No.8 of 2015 has already been concluded, except examination of the Investigating Officer. So also, the entire enquiry in the disciplinary proceedings has also been concluded and a copy of the Enquiry Officer's report is furnished to the petitioner affording him an opportunity to submit his objections on the said report. It was at that stage, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition contending that, in case if the petitioner is convicted in the above said criminal case, there would not be any necessity of further continuing the disciplinary proceedings and in case if the petitioner is acquitted, the acquittal would have bearing on the disciplinary proceedings

and therefore, petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondent to defer the disciplinary proceedings initiated and pending against him till the disposal of the said criminal case.

3. This Court, after having perused the entire materials and on carefully considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, does not find any merit in this writ petition for the simple reason that the entire trial in the said criminal case is already over and examination of the witnesses in the departmental disciplinary proceedings are also over. The departmental disciplinary proceedings have been continuing since the year 2017 and have reached the final stage. If at all the petitioner has any apprehension of causing any prejudice to him, in case if the departmental disciplinary proceedings are continued pending disposal of the criminal case registered against him, he should have approached this Court at the earliest point of time. The petitioner, having allowed the disciplinary proceedings to continue for almost about nine years and when the said proceedings reached the final stage, has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition. Therefore, on the ground of delay also, this Court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition.

4. Be that as it may, the departmental disciplinary proceedings are totally different and the nature of evidence and standard of evidence that is required to prove the charges in the departmental proceedings and in the criminal case are not one and the same. Therefore, mere pendency of the criminal case, under no circumstances, can be said to be a ground to defer the departmental disciplinary proceedings. It is not as if any prejudice would be caused to the petitioner in case if the departmental disciplinary proceedings are allowed to reach its finality.

If it is, at the stage of examination of the witnesses in the departmental disciplinary proceedings, even before examination of the said witnesses in criminal proceedings or examination of the delinquent employee in the departmental proceedings, there is a scope to say that the examination or adducing of evidence in the departmental proceedings would cause prejudice to the case of the delinquent employee in the criminal case. But, that is not the case of the petitioner herein. Therefore, this Court does not find any reason to direct the respondent to defer the disciplinary proceedings pending disposal of the criminal case.

5. In the light of the above, this Court does not find any merit in this writ petition. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. As the

petitioner is stated to have not yet submitted his reply to the impugned show cause notice dated 13.02.2026, he is granted two weeks time from today for submitting his response / objection to the impugned show cause notice. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 07.04.2026 NCC :

Yes / No Index :

Yes / No Internet :

Yes / No krk To:

1.The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Special Judge for Prevention of Corruption Act Cases, Dindigul.

2.The District Collector, Dindigul District, Dindigul.

MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J.

krk and W.M.P.(MD) No.7535 of 2026 07.04.2026