Madras High Court
D. Sureshkumar vs The Principal Secretary on 2 November, 2021
W.A. No. 2800 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 02.11.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S. VAIDYANATHAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR
W.A. No. 2800 of 2021
D. Sureshkumar ..Appellant
Vs.
1. The Principal Secretary,
Department of Municipal
Administration and Water
Supply,
Secretariat, Chennai – 9.
2. The Commissioner of Municipal
Administration,
Office of the Commissioner of
Municipal Administration,
Chepauk, Chennai – 5.
3. The Commissioner,
Nagercoil Municipality,
Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
1\6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. No. 2800 of 2021
4. The Commissioner,
Villupuram Municipality,
Villupuram, Villupuram District. ..Respondents
Prayer: Writ Appeal as against the order dated 09.01.2020 made in
W.P. No. 15360 of 2019.
For Appellant :: Mr.S. Vijayakumar
For Respondents :: Mr.K.V. Sajeev Kumar
Govt. Counsel
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S. Vaidyanathan,J.)
The writ appeal is directed against the order dated 09.01.2020 passed
in W.P. No. 15360 of 2019.
2. The main grievance of the appellant is with regard to the
observation made by the learned Single Judge in paragraph No.21 of the
impugned order dated 09.01.2020, which is to the following effect:
"21. In the result, the impugned order passed by the 1st
respondent dated 22.03.2019, is hereby quashed and there shall be a
2\6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. No. 2800 of 2021
direction to the 1st and 2nd respondents to reinstate the petitioner into
service with all attendant benefits. If at all, the 1 st respondent wants to
continue with the proceedings, he shall give sufficient opportunity to the
petitioner and seek for explanation and thereafter, apply his mind by
giving reasons and pass orders."
According to the appellant, having held that the order challenged in
the writ petition is illegal and suffers from non-application of mind and had
also ultimately quashed the said order, the learned Single Judge ought not to
have made the observation with regard to proceeding with the disciplinary
proceedings afresh.
3. Heard both parties.
4. On perusal of the materials placed before this Court, it is seen
that after the orders passed in the writ petition, the appellant was reinstated
in service and in compliance to the order passed in the writ petition, in order
to give an opportunity to the appellant in the disciplinary case before
passing orders afresh, the appellant was asked to appear for a personal
hearing. Thereafter, the appellant submitted a representation on 30.09.2020
3\6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. No. 2800 of 2021
to the 1st respondent requesting final orders to be passed in the disciplinary
proceedings. In the interregnum, contempt petition in Contempt Petition No.
167 of 2021 which was filed by the appellant alleging non-compliance of
the order passed in the writ petition was also closed giving liberty to
challenge the order dated 23.07.2020. Subsequently, adverse orders have
been passed against the appellant on 05.12.2020. Since the matter is
already over and adverse orders have been passed against the appellant, we
find no reason to interfere with the order under challenge and the appellant
is at liberty to challenge the order dated 05.12.2020. The writ appeal stands
dismissed. No costs.
(S.V.N.J.) (R.V.J.)
nv 02.11.2021
To
1. The Principal Secretary,
Department of Municipal
Administration and Water
Supply,Secretariat, Chennai – 9.
4\6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. No. 2800 of 2021
2. The Commissioner of Municipal
Administration,
Office of the Commissioner of
Municipal Administration,
Chepauk, Chennai – 5.
3. The Commissioner,
Nagercoil Municipality,
Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District.
4. The Commissioner,
Villupuram Municipality,
Villupuram, Villupuram District.
5\6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A. No. 2800 of 2021
S. VAIDYANATHAN,J.
AND
R. VIJAYAKUMAR,J.
nv
W.A. No. 2800 of 2021
02.11.2021
6\6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
