Madras High CourtWP(MD)/16931/2013disposed of

S.Joseph Raj, v. The Superintending Engineer,

2019-06-04Honourable Mr Justice S.M. Subramaniam2 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 04.06.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM W.P.(MD) No.16931 of 2013 S.Joseph Raj ... Petitioner vs.

1.The Superintending Engineer TANGEDCO Thanjavur Electricity Distribution Circle Thanjavur-7 2.The Executive Engineer TANGEDCO Operation and Maintenance Thanjavur ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to grant and disburse the petitioner's increments from the year 2002 to till date and full wages for the period of suspension from 14.08.2002 to 25.03.2003 and all other consequential benefits. For Petitioner :

Mr.T.Antony Arul Raj For Respondents :

Mr.M.Balasubramanian

O R D E R

The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the first respondent to grant and disburse the writ petitioner's increments from the year 2002 till date and full wages for the period of suspension from 14.08.2002 to 25.03.2003 and all other consequential benefits.

2. The writ petitioner was holding the post of Wireman in TANGEDCO during the year 1998 and on account of the allegation of demand and acceptance of bribe, a criminal case was registered against him under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The Trial Court acquitted the writ petitioner from the charges. The prosecution preferred an appeal against the order of acquittal and the High Court found the writ petitioner guilty and convicted him for the said offence on 22.01.2019. The special leave petition preferred by the writ petitioner before the Honourable Supreme Court of India is pending. However, the order of conviction stands against the writ petitioner as of now. Thus, he is not entitled to continue in service.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

3. The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner states that as far as the increments relating to the period in which the writ petitioner served, the same is to be disbursed in favour of the writ petitioner.

4. This Court is of the opinion that pursuant to the order of conviction, the writ petitioner is liable to be terminated from service. At the same time, the claim of payment of increments is to be considered by the authority concerned with regard to the rules in force. In this regard, the writ petitioner is directed to submit a representation setting out the facts and details to the authority concerned and in the event of submitting any such representation by the writ petitioner, the authority concerned is directed to consider the same in accordance with the rules in force.

5. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Records) / True Copy / Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) krk To:

1.The Superintending Engineer, TANGEDCO, Thanjavur Electricity Distribution Circle, Thanjavur-7.

2.The Executive Engineer, TANGEDCO, Operation and Maintenance, Thanjavur.

+1 CC to M/s.T.ANTONY ARUL RAJ, Advocate ( SR-67210[F] dated 06/06/2019 ) +1 CC to M/s.M.BALASUBRAMANIAN, Advocate ( SR-67228[F] dated 06/06/2019 ) W.P.(MD) No.16931 of 2013 04.06.2019 ES/13.06.2019/2P/5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/