Madras High Court
P.Thamilarasi vs The District Collector on 30 June, 2021
W.A.(MD)No.1247 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 30.06.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD)No.1247 of 2021
P.Thamilarasi : Appellant
Vs.
1.The District Collector,
Thoothukudi District,
Thoothukudi.
2.The District Project Officer,
Integrated Child Development Works,
Thoothukudi District,
Thoothukudi. : Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against
the order dated 12.11.2019 made in W.P.(MD)No.10719 of 2010, on the
file of this Hon'ble Court and allow this Writ Appeal.
For Appellant : Mr.A.Senthilkumar
For Respondents : Mr.R.Baskaran
Standing Counsel for Government
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/6
W.A.(MD)No.1247 of 2021
JUDGMENT
***************
[Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.]
By consent of both parties, the appeal itself is taken up for final
disposal.
2.Heard Mr.A.Senthilkumar, learned Counsel appearing for the
appellant and Mr.R.Baskaran, learned Standing Counsel for Government
appearing for the respondents.
3.The appellant had challenged the order passed by the first
respondent dated 12.11.2019, by which she was dismissed from service
on the charge of temporary misappropriation of the funds deposited by
the public under the small savings scheme. The appellant contended
before the learned Writ Court that before imposing major penalty of
dismissal from service, no enquiry was conducted and by a cryptic order,
the first respondent dismissed the appellant. Furthermore, though the
alleged incident is of the year 2004 and the appellant was placed under
suspension on 27.07.2004, charge memo was given only on 30.06.2008
and in the interregnum, no subsistence allowance was paid.
4.The learned Single Bench, on going through the submissions
set out by the residents of the Panchayat opined that there is an
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1247 of 2021
admission of charge and dismissed the writ petition. In paragraph No.4
of the impugned order, the recommendation of the President of the
Village Panchayat has been recorded, from which, we find that there is no
unequivocal and unconditional admission of guilt by the appellant.
Whereas, it is the recommendation made by the President of the Village
Panchayat stating about the poor condition of the appellant and that she
may be posted as Anganwadi worker. If such is the factual position, we
have to necessarily hold that the appellant had not admitted the charge.
5.Furthermore, if the first respondent has issued a charge memo
and adopted the major penalty procedure, domestic enquiry should have
been conducted, which has not been conducted and therefore, the order
of dismissal from service is to be interfered with. However, considering
the fact that there has been belated remittances of the amount collected
under the small savings scheme to the tune of Rs.2,62,450/-, we are of the
view that the appellant has to face the domestic enquiry and we cannot
exonerate her from these proceedings. Therefore, we would be well
justified in quashing the order of dismissal and directing the appellant to
be placed under suspension and enquiry to be conducted based on the
explanation which was given by the appellant dated nil, which has been
noted in the impugned order of dismissal. There is an allegation that the
appellant has not been paid subsistence allowance. This issue is left open
and we direct that prospectively subsistence allowance should be paid
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1247 of 2021
and enquiry should be concluded within a period of thirty [30] days from
the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
6.Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is partly allowed and the order
dated 12.11.2019, is set aside and the matter is remanded to the first
respondent to conduct an enquiry, offer an opportunity to the appellant to
lead evidence and cross examine the witnesses that may be produced by
the department and thereafter, a speaking order shall be passed by the
first respondent on merits and in accordance with law. Since the order of
dismissal has been set aside, the appellant shall be placed under
suspension with effect from 01.07.2021 and paid subsistence allowance
prospectively. The claim of retrospective payment of subsistence
allowance is left open to the appellant at the subsequent stage. As
directed, the enquiry should be conducted and final order should be
passed within a period of thirty [30] days from the date of receipt of a
copy of this judgment. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
[T.S.S., J.] & [S.A.I., J.]
30.06.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
MR
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1247 of 2021
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 District Collector,
Thoothukudi District,
Thoothukudi.
2.The District Project Officer,
Integrated Child Development Works,
Thoothukudi District,
Thoothukudi.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1247 of 2021
T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.
AND
S.ANANTHI, J.
MR
JUDGMENT MADE IN
W.A.(MD)No.1247 of 2021
30.06.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
