The District Collector v. T Ranjith

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 28.07.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR and C.M.P.(MD)No.12696 of 2024 The District Collector, Collectorate (Development Section), Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

... Appellant / Respondent Vs.

1.T.Ranjith ... 1st Respondent / Writ Petitioner 2.E.Balasubramanian ... 2nd Respondent / 2nd Respondent PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, praying this Court to set aside the order dated 18.04.2024 made in W.P.(MD)No. 24227 of 2023 on the file of this Court and to allow the writ appeal. For Appellant : Mr.Veerakathiravan Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar Additional Government Pleader For Respondents : Mr.M.Saravanakumar for R1 1/6

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was made by G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.) The department is on appeal challenging the order dated 18.04.2024 passed by the learned single Judge allowing W.P.(MD)No. 24227 of 2023.

2. The writ petitioner Ranjith joined the Rural Development Department as Rural Welfare Officer-Grade II on 19.10.1994. He became Assistant on 22.04.1998. He became Deputy Block Development Officer on 28.08.2008. The next promotional post is that of BDO. The crucial date was on 01.03.2017. It is not in dispute that on the crucial date, there was no charge framed against the writ petitioner. But the actual panel was prepared on 09.03.2018. The writ petitioner's name was not included in the panel. Hence, the writ petitioner filed the aforesaid writ petition. The writ petition was allowed on 18.04.2024.

3. The learned Additional Advocate General points out that on 23.02.2018, disciplinary action was initiated against the writ petitioner and charge memo was issued. The articles of charge framed against the writ petitioner were as follows:- 2/6

3/6

Subsequently, it also ended in punishment on 26.12.2022. The disciplinary authority passed an order of stoppage of increment for a period of one year without cumulative effect. The said order appears to have become final. We have already held in W.A.(MD)No.613 of 2025 as well as W.A.(MD)No.1820 of 2025 that if before the conferment of actual promotion, any charge memo is issued, the rights of the employee will have to abide by the outcome of the disciplinary proceedings. 4/6

4. In this view of the matter, the order of the learned single Judge is set aside. The writ appeal is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

(G.R.S., J.) (K.R.S., J.) 28.07.2025 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No rmi 5/6

G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.

AND K.RAJASEKAR, J.

rmi W.A(MD) No.1623 of 2024 28.07.2025 6/6