Madras High CourtWP(MD)/22831/2024disposed of

A.Manibalan v. State Of Tamil Nadu

2024-09-25Honourable Mr Justice R.Vijayakumar4 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 25.09.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR W.P(MD)No.22831 of 2024 and W.M.P(MD) No.19362 of 2024 A.Manibalan ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Principal Secretary to the Government, Department of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj, Secretariat, Chennai - 9.

2. The District Collector, Trichy District.

... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order in Se.Mu.No.Tha8/2060/2022, dated 08.04.2023 on the file of the second respondent and quash the same as illegal and consequently for a direction, directing the respondents to conclude the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner in pursuance to the charge memo issued by the second respondent, dated 27.07.2007 and disburse the retirement benefits to the petitioner within the time period stipulated by this Court.

1/4

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Aswin Rajasimman For Respondents : Mr.S.S.Madhavan Government Advocate

ORDER

The present Writ Petition has been filed by a former Block Development Officer, challenging the order of the second respondent dated 08.04.2023, wherein his request for revocation of suspension and for permission to retire from service has been rejected.

2. A perusal of the records reveals that the petitioner was placed under suspension for his involvement in a criminal case. However, the petitioner was acquitted on 04.07.2022.

3. The petitioner was issued with a charge memo on 27.07.2007 and an enquiry based upon the said charge memo is said to have been completed. However, final orders are yet to be passed in the departmental proceedings. 2/4

4. In view of the above said facts, this Court does not find any reason to interfere in the order passed by the second respondent refusing to revoke the order of suspension or not permitting the writ petitioner retiring from service.

5. It would suffice if this Court directs the second respondent to conclude the enquiry and forward the same to the first respondent within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6. With the above said observations, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition stands closed.

25.09.2024 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No ebsi To

1. The Principal Secretary Department of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj, Secretariat, Chennai - 9.

2. The District Collector, Trichy District.

3/4

R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J.

ebsi W.P(MD)No.22831 of 2024 25.09.2024 4/4