Ramachandran.K v. The District Educational Officer (Elementary Education)

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT JUDGMENT RESERVED ON : 28.11.2023 JUDGMENT PRONOUNDED ON : 30.11.2023

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR REV.APLW(MD)No.231 of 2023 in WP(MD).No.23253 of 2023 K.Ramachandran ....Petitioners Vs 1.The District Educational Officer (Elementary Education) Office of the District Educational Officer (Elementary Education) Government Boys Higher Secondary School Campus Paramakudi Ramanathapuram District 623 707 2.The Director of Elementary Education Directorate of Elementary Education DPI Campus, College Road Chennai 600 006

...Respondents

Prayer:- Review Application filed under Section 114 and Order XL VII Rule 1 & 2 of C.P.C, to review the order passed in W.P(MD).No.23253 of 2023, dated 18.10.2023.

1/4

For Appellants : Mr.K.Ramachandran (Party-in-person) For Respondents : Mr.N.GA.Natraj Government Advocate

JUDGMENT

The present review petition has been filed by the writ petitioner in WP(MD).No.23253 of 2023 seeking to review the order of this Court dated 18.10.2023.

2.The said writ petition has been filed challenging the charge memo issued to the writ petitioner. This Court after going through the charge memo, was of the opinion that the charges are serious in nature requiring disciplinary proceedings and rejected the writ petition. 3.The present review petition has been filed contending that when the criminal proceedings are pending, simultaneously departmental proceedings cannot be permitted to continue. The petitioner has relied upon certain guidelines issued by Human Resources Management Department, Government of Tamil Nadu wherein it has been held that only in cases where the criminal proceedings are connected with the discharge of official duties, the disciplinary proceedings may be initiated. But, in the present 2/4

case, according to the petitioner, the allegations as against the petitioner are no way connected with the discharge of his official duties. 4.This Court in paragraph Nos.11 and 12 of the order has pointed out that the charges 3 and 4 relate to misconduct of the writ petitioner relating to his commercial activities in violation of the Government Servant Conduct Rules. Therefore, the contention of the writ petitioner that the misconduct is no way connected with discharge of his official duty is not legally sustainable. That apart, the other grounds raised by the review petitioner are nothing but re-arguing the same grounds raised at the time of the writ petition.

5.In view of the above said deliberations, there are no merits in the Review Petition. The Review Petition stands dismissed. No costs. 30.11.2023 Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No NCC : Yes/No msa 3/4

R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J.

msa Pre-Delivery Judgment made in REV.APLW(MD)No.231 of 2023 in WP(MD).No.23253 of 2023 30.11.2023 4/4