The General Manager, v. The Special Deputy
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.11.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY and M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2014 and W.M.P.(MD).No.17771 of 2017 The General Manager, Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Limited, Pudukkottai Region, Thirumayam Road, Pudukkottai.
... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Special Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Chennai - 600 006.
2.S.Muthu ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the first respondent herein dated 27.12.2012 in A.P.No.80 of 2011, quash the same.
1/7
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Sivaraman For R-1 : Mrs.D.Farjana Ghoushia, Special Government Pleader.
For R-2 : Mr.S.Deenadhayalan
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed to quash the order dated dated 27.12.2012 in A.P.No.80 of 2011.
2. The second respondent was working as a Driver in the petitioner Corporation. A charge memo dated 04.05.2009 was issued for the charge of unauthorized absence from 06.09.2008 and imposed with a punishment of dismissal from service. The second respondent has challenged the same before the first respondent authority, wherein, the punishment was set aside. Aggrieved over the order passed by the first respondent, the petitioner's Management preferred this Writ Petition. The dismissal order was placed before the appropriate authority for approval and the same was rejected. When the case of one Thangavel was heard by the Hon'ble High Court in W.P.No. 25100 of 2017 dated 30.07.2021, the learned Single Judge directed the petitioner's Management to consider the delinquents who had faced disciplinary 2/7
proceedings apart from misappropriation, thereby, considering them for a lesser punishment of compulsory retirement on the date of their dismissal. The petitioner's Management has formulated the scheme and more than 100 delinquents were availed the benefits of the said scheme.
3. In this case, the second respondent also submitted an undertaking to this effect and the same is extracted hereunder: 3/7
4/7
4. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the second respondent present before this Court. When this Court enquired the second respondent with regard to the submission of such undertaking, he also accepted the same and still he stands by the same. It was informed to the second respondent that the petitioner's Management has formulated a scheme that the employee is permitted to go on compulsory retirement on the date of dismissal and the second respondent also agreed for the same. The date of dismissal of the petitioner in the present case is on 26.02.2011.
5. Therefore, this Court is directing the petitioner Management to modify the punishment of the second respondent as compulsory retirement on 26.02.2011, that is the date of dismissal and disburse all the terminal and pensionable benefits to the second respondent. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
5/7
6. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
17.11.2022 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No Nsr To The Special Deputy Commissioner of Labour, Chennai - 600 006.
6/7
S.SRIMATHY, J.
Nsr 17.11.2022 7/7