Pattamuthu v. The Assistant Executive Engineer (Rural) (Distribution)
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:23.12.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI Pattamuthu ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Assistant Executive Engineer (Rural) (Distribution), Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District.
2.The Executive Engineer (Distribution), Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District.
3. The Assistant Engineer (Distribution), Ettayapuram, Thoothukudi District.
4. The Superintending Engineer(Distribution) , Thoothukudi Electricity Distribution Circle, Thoothukudi, Thoothukudi District.
1/6
5. The Chief Engineer(Distribution) Tirunelveli.
6. Micavel The Assistant Executive Engineer (Rural) (Distribution), Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District. ... Respondents Prayer:Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to restrain petitioner from conducting the Departmental enquiry against petitioner in pursuance of his proceeding in Ku.No.Vu.Se.Po/Vi/Ooragam/Kopatti/E.Ni Vu/A.No.092/2022, dated 23.11.2022 based upon petitioner reply representation, dated 12.12.2022. For Petitioner : Mr.C.Selvakumar For Respondents : Mr.S.Arivalagan Standing Council
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed for a direction to the first respondent to restrain from conducting departmental enquiry against petitioner in pursuance of his proceeding in Ku.No.Vu.Se.Po/Vi/Ooragam/Kopatti/E.Ni Vu/A.No.092/2022, dated 2/6
23.11.2022 based upon petitioner reply representation, dated 12.12.2022.
2. The case of the petitioner is that while he was working as a Foreman under the third respondent, he was placed under suspension on 15.10.2022. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed a writ petition in W.P(MD)No.24676 of 2022 wherein this Court vide order, dated 02.11.2022, directed to consider the request of the petitioner for revocation of suspension. Subsequently, the first respondent vide proceedings, dated 23.11.2022, issued a charge memo and called for explanation from the petitioner. In the meanwhile, the second respondent rejected the request of the petitioner for revocation of suspension vide order, dated 03.12.2022. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a detailed explanation on 12.12.2022. However, till date the disciplinary proceedings was not completed. Hence, the petitioner has filed this writ petition with the aforesaid prayer.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that it would suffice, if the fifth respondent is directed to conclude the 3/6
disciplinary proceedings within a reasonable time.
4. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents has no serious objection for such an order being passed by this Court.
5. Considering the limited request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court, without going into the merits of the matter, directs the fifth respondent to consider the petitioner's explanation, dated 12.12.2022 and conclude the disciplinary proceedings after providing opportunity to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
23.12.2022 pm Index:Yes/No 4/6
To The Chief Engineer(Distribution) Tirunelveli.
5/6
M.DHANDAPANI,J.
pm 23.12.2022 6/6