Madras High Court
M.Ganesan vs The Assistant Director Of ... on 16 June, 2021
W.P(MD)No.10153 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 16.06.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI
W.P(MD)No.10153 of 2021
and
W.M.P.(MD)Nos.7870 & 7871 of 2021
M.Ganesan ... Petitioner
vs.
1.The Assistant Director of Municipalities,
Dindigul Zone,
Dindigul.
2.The Executive Officer,
Puliyur Municipality,
Puliyur C.F. (Post),
Karur Taluk,
Karur District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating
to the impugned suspension order in proceedings Na.Ka.No.185/2020
dated 05.11.2020, on the file of the 2nd respondent and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.N.Ramanathan
For Respondents : Mr.P.Subbaraj,
Government Advocate for R1
Mr.A.K.Manickam for R2
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/6
W.P(MD)No.10153 of 2021
ORDER
The petitioner filed this Writ Petition to quash the impugned
suspension order passed by the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.
185/2020, dated 05.11.2020.
2. The case of the petitioner is that due to personal vengeance, his
brother Sakthivel has given a false criminal case against him and the
same was registered in Crime No.656 of 2020, for the alleged offences
under Sections 294(b), 323 & 506(i) IPC and he was arrested on
05.11.2020. In view of the registration of the FIR, the second
respondent, by his proceedings dated 05.11.2020, suspended the
petitioner from service, without mentioning the time limit. The above
said crime number was charge sheeted and taken on file in C.C.No.205 of
2020, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.I, Karur. However,
for the past eight months, no charge memo was issued to the petitioner.
The petitioner is having two children and he is unable to run his family
for the past eight months. In this regard, he has sent a detailed
representation to the respondents on 11.11.2020, to revoke his
suspension. However, till date, the same has not been considered by the
respondents. Hence, the petitioner has come forward with this Writ
Petition for the relief stated supra.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)No.10153 of 2021
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the
learned Government Advocate appearing for the first respondent and the
learned counsel appearing for the second respondent.
4. From the materials available on record and the averments made
in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it is seen that the
petitioner was arrested on 05.11.2020 in Crime No.656 of 2020, for the
alleged offences under Sections 294(b), 323 & 506(i) IPC and thereafter,
he was enlarged on bail. The second respondent by proceedings dated
05.11.2020, suspended the petitioner from service, in view of the
registration of criminal case and arrest of the petitioner. The petitioner
himself has stated in the affidavit that charge sheet has been filed in
C.C.No.205 of 2020, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court No.I,
Karur. The issue of revocation of suspension was considered by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgment in Ajay Kumar Choudhary Vs.
Union of India reported in 2015 (7) SCC 291. The Hon'ble Apex Court
held that when a delinquent employee is suspended from service pending
criminal case or disciplinary proceedings, if charge sheet is not filed or
charge memo is not served on the delinquent, then suspension order must
be revoked. When the charge sheet is filed in criminal case or charge
memo is served on the delinquent, the remedy available to the delinquent
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)No.10153 of 2021
is to make a representation for revocation of suspension. On receipt of
such representation, the concerned authority shall consider the
representation of the delinquent and pass orders for revocation of
suspension or rejecting the representation. Such order is subject to
judicial review. The relevant portions of the said judgment of the
Hon'ble Apex Court read as follows:-
''21. We, therefore, direct that the currency of a suspension
order should not extend beyond three months if within this
period the memorandum of charges/charge-sheet is not served on
the delinquent officer/employee; if the memorandum of
charges/charge-sheet is served, a reasoned order must be passed
for the extension of the suspension. As in the case in hand, the
Government is free to transfer the person concerned to any
department in any of its offices within or outside the State so as
to sever any local or personal contact that he may have and
which he may misuse for obstructing the investigation against
him. The Government may also prohibit him from contacting any
person, or handling records and documents till the stage of his
having to prepare his defence. We think this will adequately
safeguard the universally recognised principle of human dignity
and the right to a speedy trial and shall also preserve the interest
of the Government in the prosecution. We recognise that the
previous Constitution Benches have been reluctant to quash
proceedings on the grounds of delay, and to set time-limits to
their duration. However, the imposition of a limit on the period
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)No.10153 of 2021
of suspension has not been discussed in prior case law, and
would not be contrary to the interests of justice. Furthermore, the
direction of the Central Vigilance Commission that pending a
criminal investigation, departmental proceedings are to be held in
abeyance stands superseded in view of the stand adopted by us.
22. So far as the facts of the present case are concerned,
the appellant has now been served with a charge-sheet, and,
therefore, these directions may not be relevant to him any longer.
However, if the appellant is so advised he may challenge his
continued suspension in any manner known to law, and this
action of the respondents will be subject to judicial review.''
5. In view of the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court,
the second respondent is directed to consider the representation of the
petitioner dated 11.11.2020 and pass orders either revoking the order of
suspension or rejecting the representation of the petitioner by giving
valid reasons.
6. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No
costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
vsm 16.06.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)No.10153 of 2021
V.M.VELUMANI,J.
vsm
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.
To
1.The Assistant Director of Municipalities,
Dindigul Zone,
Dindigul.
2.The Executive Officer,
Puliyur Municipality,
Puliyur C.F. (Post),
Karur Taluk,
Karur District
W.P(MD)No.10153 of 2021
16.06.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
