Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 5236 Mad
Judgement Date : 26 February, 2021
W.A.(MD)No.115 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 26.02.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD)No.115 of 2020
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.1014 of 2020
1. The Tamil Nadu State Transport
Corporation Ltd.,
Kumbakonam Division-II, Trichy-I,
Rep. by the General Manager (Operation)
Tamil Nadu State Transport
Corporation Ltd.,
Trichy – 1.
2. The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu State Transport
Corporation Ltd.,
Kumbakonam Division-II, Trichy -1. ... Appellants
Vs.
1. R.M.Chitra
2. The State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. by its Secretary,
Transport Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai – 600 009. ... Respondents
Writ Appeal filed under Clause XV of Letters Patent Act, against the
order dated 01.02.2019 made in W.P.(MD)No.19089 of 2014.
http://www.judis.nic.in
1/4
W.A.(MD)No.115 of 2020
For Appellants : Mr.D.Sivaraman
For Respondents : Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu
for Mr.K.Gurunathan for R1
JUDGMENT
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.]
This Writ Appeal has been preferred against the order of the learned
Single Judge, while upholding the findings on merits including the past conduct
of the employee, found the punishment as grossly disproportionate to the charges
framed and accordingly, modified the same as one of compulsory retirement.
2. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the reasoning
given by the learned Single Judge is not correct, merely because, different
punishment was imposed on earlier occasion and again, the punishment imposed
thereafter cannot be assailed. It is for the employer to impose appropriate
punishment in accordance with law. The only reason given by the learned Single
Judge is that had the orders been passed earlier, the present situation would not
have occurred. Such reasoning cannot be sustained in the eye of law.
3. We are concerned with the punishment imposed pursuant to the
order passed by the learned Single Judge. It is a case of unauthorized absence. http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)No.115 of 2020
Taking note of the cumulative facts available, the learned Single Judge modified
the punishment to one of compulsory retirement. Such discretion exercised is not
required to be interfered with. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed.
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[M.M.S.J.,] [S.A.I.J.,] 26.02.2021 ogy
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.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.A.(MD)No.115 of 2020
M.M.SUNDRESH, J.
and S.ANANTHI, J.
ogy
W.A.(MD)No.115 of 2020
26.02.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!