A.P.Rajendran, v. The Managing Director,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.10.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.10502 & 10503 of 2017 A.P.Rajendran ... Petitioner -vs1.The Managing Director State Express Transport Corporation Tamilnadu Limited, Chennai-2 2.The General Manager (Admin) State Express Transport Corporation Tamilnadu Limited, Chennai-2 3.The Branch Manager Branch Office State Express Transport Corporation Tamilnadu Limited, Thanjavur ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the proceedings in Ku.No.42287/TL.2/Aa.Vi.Po.Ka/2013 dated 23.06.2015

passed by the first respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents herein to settle all the payments payable by the respondents to the petitioner on the basis of his representation dated 17.08.2016. For Petitioner :

Mr.B.Jameel Arasu For Respondents :

Mr.K.Sathiya Singh Standing Counsel

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed challenging the proceedings of the first respondent, dated 23.06.2015, under which the petitioner's request to settle all the payments payable by the respondents to him based on his representation dated 17.08.2016 has been rejected.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on account of the pendency of the criminal case, the respondent - Transport Corporation did not settle certain payments to the petitioner for his services rendered to the respondent - Transport Corporation. The petitioner is working as a Driver in the respondent - Transport Corporation.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would now submit that the criminal case has now ended in acquittal, despite the same, the respondents have rejected the petitioner's request under the impugned order dated 23.06.2015.

4. However, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent - Transport Corporation would submit that the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner by the respondent - Transport Corporation is still pending. He would submit that the enquiry is yet to be completed. He would further submit that a direction may be issued to the respondents to complete the enquiry within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. He would further submit that the relief sought for in this writ petition is premature, since the enquiry is yet to be completed.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner is also satisfied, if a direction is issued to the respondents to complete the enquiry within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

6. By recording the submissions of both the learned counsels, this Court directs the second respondent to complete the enquiry in respect of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner by affording a fair hearing to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Once the Enquiry Officer holds that the petitioner is innocent of the charges framed against him, the second respondent is directed to disburse all the eligible payments payable to the petitioner, which have not been paid earlier on account of his suspension from service, within a period of twelve weeks from the date when the petitioner has proved his innocence with regard to the charges framed against him by the respondent - Corporation in the disciplinary proceedings.

7. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 17.10.2024 NCC :

Yes / No Index :

Yes / No Internet :

Yes / No krk

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

krk and W.M.P.(MD) Nos.10502 & 10503 of 17.10.2024