Madras High Court
S.Selvaraj vs The Principal Secretary To ... on 17 December, 2021
W.P(MD)No.696 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 17.12.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
W.P(MD)No.696 of 2020
and
W.M.P.(MD)Nos.506 and 507 of 2020
S.Selvaraj ... Petitioner
versus
1. The Principal Secretary to Government,
Commercial Taxes & Registration
Department,
Secretariat,
Fort St. George,
Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes,
Commercial Taxes Department,
Chepauk,
Chennai – 600 005. ... Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
seeking for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for
the records relating to the impugned order passed by the first
respondent in his letter No.234/E1/2019-10 dated 04.12.2019, quash
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.696 of 2020
the same and direct the respondents to revoke the punishment of
dismissal from service of the petitioner with all consequential monetary
and other attendant benefits including terminal benefits within the time
stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.H.Mohammed Imran
for M/s.Ajmal Associates
For Respondents : Mr.A.Kannan,
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
This writ petition is filed as against the order dated 04.12.2019,
in and by which, the first respondent rejected the request of the
petitioner for reinstatement into service and also for disbursement of
retirement benefits.
2. The petitioner joined the service in the Commercial Taxes
Department as Junior Assistant on 01.06.1976. Thereafter, he was
promoted as Assistant Commercial Tax Officer and Deputy
Commercial Tax officer. In the year 2004, he was promoted as
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.696 of 2020
Commercial Tax Officer. While so, one Dharmaraj gave a complaint
as against one Selvakumar. Based on that complaint, a case in Crime
No.6 of 2005 was registered against him for the offence punishable
under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act. Thereafter, the said
Dharmaraj has also made certain allegations against the petitioner,
based on which, the petitioner was also added in the FIR. Pursuant to
the registration of case, the first respondent passed an order of
suspension on 22.12.2005. Against the order of suspension, the
petitioner filed a writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.65 of 2006 and this
Court granted an interim stay. Subsequently, the petitioner was
reinstated into service. In the meantime, a charge sheet has been filed
before the Special Court for Corruption Cases (Chief Judicial
Magistrate), Srivilliputhur and the same was taken on file as
Spl.C.C.No.5 of 2006. After the trial, the trial Court, vide order dated
09.04.2020, convicted and sentenced the petitioner for the offences
charged. The first respondent, without initiating any departmental
proceedings, removed the petitioner from service on 28.01.2014.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.696 of 2020
Challenging the order of conviction and sentence, the petitioner filed
an appeal in Crl.A.(MD)No.145 of 2010 before this Court. This Court,
vide Judgment dated 02.11.2018, set aside the order of conviction and
sentence imposed by the trial Court and acquitted the petitioner from
all the charges. Pursuant to the Judgment of acquittal passed by this
Court in Crl.A.(MD)No.145 of 2010, the petitioner sent a
representation dated 01.01.2019, requesting the first respondent to
reinstate him into service and to grant all service benefits. Since there
was no response from the first respondent, the petitioner filed a writ
petition in W.P.(MD)No.13347 of 2019 before this Court and this
Court, vide order dated 23.07.2019, disposed of the writ petition,
directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation
dated 01.01.2019. In compliance of the order passed by this Court in
W.P.(MD)No.13347 of 2019, the first respondent considered the
representation of the petitioner, by rejecting the request made by him,
vide order dated 04.12.2019, which is impugned in this writ petition.
Challenging the same, the present writ petition has been filed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.696 of 2020
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted
that in view of acquittal from all the charges, the petitioner is entitled
for reinstatement and other service benefits. However, the first
respondent rejected the request of the petitioner, which is unsustainable
in law. Hence, he prayed for allowing the writ petition.
4. Mr.A.Kannan, learned Additional Government Pleader
appearing for the respondents submits that as against the Judgment of
acquittal passed by this Court in Crl.A.No.145 of 2010, dated
02.11.2018, the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption
Department filed a Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in S.L.P. (Criminal) Diary No.27138 of 2020. Since the appeal
was pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the first respondent
rejected the request of the petitioner. Now, the appeal came to be
dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, vide order 21.10.2021 and
the respondents are also ready to reconsider the case of the petitioner
afresh.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.696 of 2020
5. This Court paid its anxious consideration to the rival
submissions made.
6. Though a criminal case has been registered against the
petitioner in the year 2006, the Department, without initiating any
departmental proceedings, dismissed the petitioner from service,
pursuant to the order of conviction and sentence imposed by the trial
Court in Spl.C.C.No.5 of 2006. The said order of conviction and
sentence was challenged by the petitioner before this Court in Crl.A.
(MD)No.145 of 2010 and the same was set aside by this Court, vide
Judgment dated 02.11.2018. When the order of conviction and
sentence imposed by the trial Court was set aside, nothing prevents the
respondents from considering the case of the petitioner afresh. As a
subsequent development, it is now brought to the notice of this Court
by the learned Additional Government Pleader that the Special Leave
Petition filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court as against the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.696 of 2020
Judgment of acquittal passed by this Court dated 02.11.2018 was
dismissed.
7. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed. The
impugned order passed by the first respondent dated 04.12.2019 is set
aside and the matter is remitted back to the first respondent. The first
respondent shall consider the case of the petitioner afresh and pass
appropriate orders, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt
of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petitions are closed.
17.12.2021
Index : Yes / No.
Internet: Yes / No.
ogy
To
1. The Principal Secretary to Government,
Commercial Taxes & Registration
Department,
Secretariat,
Fort St. George,
Chennai – 600 009.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.696 of 2020
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
ogy
2. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes,
Commercial Taxes Department,
Chepauk,
Chennai – 600 005.
W.P(MD)No.696 of 2020
17.12.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
