Madras High Court
Chinnakannu vs The Chairman on 16 April, 2021
W.A.(MD)Nos.136 and 137 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 16.04.2021
CORAM :
The Hon'ble Mr.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
AND
The Hon'ble Mrs.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD) Nos.136 and 137 of 2021
Chinnakannu
... Appellant/Petitioner
(in both Writ Appeals)
Vs
1. The Chairman,
TANGEDCO Ltd.,
Annasalai, Chennai.
2. The Superintendent of Police,
Karur Electricity Distribution Circle,
TANGEDCO Ltd., Karur. ... Respondents/Respondents
(in both Writ Appeals)
3. The Executive Engineer (Rural),
Karur Distribution Circle,
Karur. ... Respondent/Respondent
(in W.A(MD).No.137 of 2021)
__________
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)Nos.136 and 137 of 2021
Common Prayer: Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the
order dated 10.11.2020, passed in W.P(MD).Nos.6463 and 15644 of 2014.
For Appellant : Mr.S.Muthukrishnan
in both Writ Appeals
For Respondents : Mrs.P.Malini,
for M/s.T.S.Gopalan
in both Writ Appeals
COMMON JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM,J.]
These appeals have been filed by the appellant challenging the order
dated 10.11.2020, passed in W.P(MD).Nos.6463 and 15644 of 2014.
2. The writ petitions were filed by the appellant challenging the
charge memo as well as the order of suspension, on the ground that for the
same set of allegations, criminal case was filed against the appellant which
was ultimately ended in acquittal in Crl.A.No.482 of 2005, by judgment
dated 12.07.2013.
__________
Page 2 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)Nos.136 and 137 of 2021
3. It is settled law in service jurisprudence that criminal proceedings
and departmental proceedings can proceed parallelly. The respondent-Board
had retained the appellant in service and not permitted him to retire on
attaining the age of superannuation by invoking the relevant provisions of
the TNEB Service Regulations.
4. Considering the grounds raised in the writ petitions as well as the
arguments put forth before us, we find that there is no ground made out to
quash the charge memo or the order of deemed suspension and retain him in
service. Therefore, the appellant should submit his explanation to the charge
memo and participate in the departmental proceedings. There is no ground
to interfere in the action initiated by the respondent-Board.
5. Accordingly these writ appeals stand dismissed. After we have
dictated the judgment, the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant
submitted that some time frame may be fixed for concluding the
departmental proceedings. If the appellant submit his explanation to the
__________
Page 3 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)Nos.136 and 137 of 2021
charge memo within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a
copy of this judgment, the respondents shall conclude the departmental
proceedings within a period of eight weeks thereafter, provided the
appellant extends cooperation. No costs.
(T.S.S.,J.) (S.A.I.,J.)
16.04.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
pkn
Note : In view of the present lock down
owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web
copy of the order may be utilized for
official purposes, but, ensuring that
the copy of the order that is presented
is the correct copy, shall be the
responsibility of the advocate/litigant
concerned.
__________
Page 4 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)Nos.136 and 137 of 2021
To
1. The Chairman,
TANGEDCO Ltd.,
Annasalai, Chennai.
2. The Superintendent of Police,
Karur Electricity Distribution Circle,
TANGEDCO Ltd., Karur.
3. The Executive Engineer (Rural),
Karur Distribution Circle,
Karur.
__________
Page 5 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)Nos.136 and 137 of 2021
T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.
and
S.ANANTHI, J.
pkn
W.A.(MD) Nos.136 and 137 of 2021
16.04.2021
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
