← Library
Madras High CourtWP(MD)/17278/2023disposed of

Natarajan.V v. The Managing Director

2025-11-18Honourable Mr Justice Abdul Quddhose6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 18.11.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE and W.M.P.(MD) No.14467 of 2023 V.Natarajan ... Petitioner -vs1.The Managing Director Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation Limited (Kumbakonam) Ltd.

Kumbakonam 2.The General Manager Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation Limited (Kumbakonam) Ltd.

Trichy Region, Trichy 3.The Enquiry Officer Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation Limited (Kumbakonam) Ltd.

Trichy Region, Trichy ... Respondents

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the entire records in connection with the impugned order of the 3rd respondent by dated 11.07.2023 quash the same as illegal and consequently directing the 3rd respondent to permit the petitioner to take Assistance of one Mr.Sirumbannan in the domestic enquiry based on the petitioner's representation dated 12.07.2023 within the time stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner :

Mr.D.Anbarasu For Respondents :

Mr.K.Ramaiah Standing Counsel

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 11.07.2023, passed by the third respondent, rejecting the petitioner's request to seek assistance of a co-worker, who is employed in another region, for assisting the petitioner in the enquiry proceeding pursuant to the charges framed against him in the disciplinary proceedings.

2. Since the co-worker Mr.Sirumbannan belongs to another region, the third respondent has rejected the petitioner's request, as according to them, as per the Standing Orders, only from the very same region, where the petitioner is now employed, the co-worker can assist the petitioner in the disciplinary proceedings.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents denying the contentions of the petitioner.

4. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that if the co-worker, whom the petitioner is seeking for assistance, belongs to the very same region, where the petitioner is now working, there is no prohibition for the petitioner to seek his assistance. He would submit that only if the co-worker belongs to another region, as per the Standing Orders, the petitioner cannot seek his / her assistance.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would now submit that the petitioner is willing to seek the assistance of a co-worker belonging to the very

same region where the petitioner is now working, instead of seeking the assistance of the co-worker from another region as was his earlier stand.

6. Since the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents has not raised any serious objection for the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is willing to seek the assistance of a co-worker in the very same region, where he is now working, this Court, after recording the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner on instructions, can dispose of this writ petition in terms of the said statement.

7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of by permitting the petitioner to seek assistance of a co-worker belonging to Trichy Region, where he is now working during the enquiry proceedings conducted by the respondents pursuant to the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him. The petitioner shall inform the name of the co-worker, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, to the third respondent. On receiving such information from the petitioner within the stipulated time, the third respondent shall permit the petitioner to seek assistance of the said

co-worker in the enquiry proceedings and shall submit the enquiry report, by affording a fair hearing to the petitioner and by adhering to the principles of natural justice, within a period of twelve weeks thereafter. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall fully cooperate with the enquiry proceedings so that no delay is caused in the submission of the enquiry report by the Enquiry Officer.

8. In terms of the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. 18.11.2025 NCC :

Yes / No Index :

Yes / No Internet :

Yes / No krk

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

krk and W.M.P.(MD) No.14467 of 2023 18.11.2025