The Commissioner v. T. Kanchana
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 23.01.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE and C.M.P.(MD).No.18633 of 2024 1.The Commissioner, Tamil Nadu Survey and Settlement Department, Survey House, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
2.The Regional Deputy Director, Survey and Land Records, Collector Office Road, Madurai - 625 020.
3.The Assistant Director and P.A. to Collector, Survey and Land Records, Collector Office Road, Madurai - 625 020.
4.The District Collector, Survey and Land Records, Collector Office, Collector Office Road, Madurai - 625 020.
5.The Tahsildar, Taluk Office, Usilampatti, Madurai District.
... Appellants/Respondents
Vs.
T.Kanchana ... Respondent/Writ Petitioner PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, praying to set aside the order dated 18.06.2024 passed in W.P.(MD).No.12885 of 2024 and allow the Writ Appeal.
For Appellants : Mr.S.R.A.Ramachandran Additional Government Pleader For Respondent : Mr.V.Balasubramanian
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by M.S.RAMESH,J.) This Writ Appeal has been filed against the order of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(MD).No.12885 of 2024 dated 18.06.2024.
2. On the ground that a criminal case has been registered by the Director of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Madurai against the respondent herein, she was placed under suspension on 03.01.2022. Claiming that the suspension has been prolonged inordinately, the respondent had challenged the suspension order and the Writ Court, through its order dated 18.06.2024, passed in W.P. (MD).No.12885 of 2024, had revoked the suspension order, which is under challenge in this appeal.
3. Admittedly, the Director of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption had completed the investigation in Crime No.18/2021 and have also laid the charge sheet, which is now pending in S.C.No.14 of 2022 on the file of the Special Court for DVAC Cases, Madurai. Simultaneously, the Department has also initiated domestic action by framing of charges through a charge memo dated 09.05.2022 and the enquiry is said to be pending. In view of these developments, we do not find any justification as to why the suspension of the respondent herein should be continued.
4. The learned Single Judge had taken into account the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of P.Kannan and another Vs. The Commissioner of Municipal Administration and others (W.P.Nos.2165 of 2015 and 21628 of 2018 dated 15.03.2022), as well as the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ajay Kumar Choudhary Vs. Union of India and another reported in AIR 2015 SC 2389 and had interfered with the suspension order.
5. In our view, in view of the developments both in the criminal case, as well as in the departmental action, no prejudice would be caused to the appellants, if the respondent herein is reinstated back into service.
6. In the light of the above observations, there are no grounds to interfere with the order passed in the Writ Petition. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition stands closed.
(M.S.R.,J.) (A.D.M.C.,J.) 23.01.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Lm
M.S.RAMESH,J.
and A.D.MARIA CLETE,J.
Lm 23.01.2025