Madras High Court
S.Jeyakumar vs The District Collector on 15 November, 2021
W.P.(MD)No.8582 of 2018
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 15.11.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
W.P.(MD)No.8582 of 2018
and
W.M.P.(MD)No.8067 of 2018
S.Jeyakumar ...Petitioner
/Vs./
1.The District Collector,
Theni District,
Theni.
2.The District Revenue Officer,
Theni District,
Theni. ...Respondents
PRAYER:- Writ Petition - filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the
Respondents to defer the departmental proceedings in pursuance to the
Charge Memo in Na.Ka.No.20341/2013/A5 dated 09.07.2013 on the file
of the Respondent No.2 until the conclusion of the criminal case in
C.C.No.38/2014 on the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Madurai,
Madurai District.
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.8582 of 2018
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Louis
For Respondents : Mr.A.K.Manikkam
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
Heard Mr.S.Louis, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr.A.K.Manikkam, learned Special Government Pleader for the
respondents.
2.The short point that arises is as to whether the disciplinary
proceedings that have been initiated as against the petitioner, should
await conclusion of the criminal case pending before the Additional
Mahila Court, Madurai.
3.The brief facts are that the petitioner was serving as Special
Revenue Inspector in the office of the Special Tahsildar (Land
Acquisition) Adi Dravidar Welfare Section, Theni. A criminal case came
to be registered by the wife of the petitioner in Crime No.24 of 2013
dated 19.06.2013 on the file of All Women Police Station, Thallakulam,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.8582 of 2018
Madurai and charge sheeted in C.C.No.38 of 2014, pending presently on
the file of the Additional Mahila Court, Madurai.
4.Though the petitioner was initially placed under suspension,
he challenged the order of suspension in W.P.(MD)No.15144 of 2013 and
obtained an order of interim stay on 13.09.2013. The writ petition came
to be disposed on 04.06.2019 to the effect that pending writ petition, the
order of suspension had been revoked and thus, nothing further was
required to be done in that case. The petitioner thus continues in service,
at present.
5.While this is so, a Charge memo dated 09.07.2013 in terms of
Section 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules,
1955, (Rules) was issued to the petitioner, where three out of the four
charges levelled relate to the same subject matter as in the criminal case.
To reiterate, the charges substantially relate to, and revolve around the
petitioner's alleged illicit liaison with a woman, despite him being
married to another.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.8582 of 2018
6.Though normally, the settled position in law is to the effect
that disciplinary proceedings and criminal proceedings could continue
parallely without awaiting the result of the other, and without one
standing as an impediment in the conduct of the other, a perusal of the
charge sheet in criminal proceedings and charge memo in the disciplinary
proceedings would show close identity of the allegations/charges levelled
as against the petitioner.
7.Since the criminal proceedings are stated to be at the stage of
examination of witnesses and are thus imminent for conclusion shortly, I
would deem it appropriate that the disciplinary proceedings await
conclusion of the criminal matter, in order that there is uniformity in
approach and appreciation of the issues in both matters.
8.In this context, I may refer to a Judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of State Bank of India vs. Neelam Nag (2016
(9) SCC 491) circulated by learned Special Government Pleader, which
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.8582 of 2018
also deals with the similar issue as before me now, as to whether the
simultaneous conduct of disciplinary and criminal proceedings is the
norm to be applied in all matters.
9.At para 21, the Hon'ble Bench stays the disciplinary
proceedings till closure of recording of evidence of the prosecution
witnesses cited in the criminal trial fixing a time for completion of the
matter before the criminal Court. Para 21 of the Judgment reads thus:
“21. Accordingly, we exercise discretion
in favour of the respondent of staying the ongoing
disciplinary proceedings until the closure of
recording of evidence of prosecution witnesses
cited in the criminal trial, as directed by the
Division Bench of the High Court and do not
consider it fit to vacate that arrangement
straightway. Instead, in our opinion, interests of
justice would be sufficiently served by directing the
criminal case pending against the respondent to be
decided expeditiously but not later than one year
from the date of this order. The Trial Court shall
take effective steps to ensure that the witnesses are
served, appear and are examined on day-to-day
basis. In case any adjournment becomes
inevitable, it should not be for more than a
fortnight when necessary.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.8582 of 2018
10.In the present matter as well, since the criminal proceedings
are stated to be imminent for closure, I direct the Additional Mahila
Court, Madurai, to complete the pending proceedings in C.C.No.38/2014
within a period of three months from 1st of December, 2021 to which
date, and the hearing stands advanced from 17.12.2021 when it is stated
to be listed next, and conclude proceedings on or before 28.02.2022. The
observations and directions of the Hon'ble Bench in the case of Neelam
Nag (supra) at para 21 would apply on all fours to the present matter
pending before the criminal Court as well.
11.The protection granted under this order shall enure to the
petitioner only till 28.02.2022 when the disciplinary proceedings shall
stand revived for continuation by the authorities.
12.Paragraph Nos.22 and 23 of the Judgment are extracted
below in the interests of completion:
“22. We also direct that the respondent
shall extend full cooperation to the Trial Court for
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.8582 of 2018
an early disposal of the trial, which includes
cooperation by the Advocate appointed by her.
23. If the trial is not completed within one year
from the date of this order, despite the steps which
the Trial Court has been directed to take the
disciplinary proceedings against the respondent
shall be resumed by the enquiry officer concerned.
The protection given to the respondent of keeping
the disciplinary proceedings in abeyance shall then
stand vacated forthwith upon expiring of the period
of one year from the date of this order.”
13.In light of the discussion above, the mandamus, as sought
for, stands achieved and this Writ Petition is disposed in the aforesaid
terms. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is
closed.
15.11.2021
Internet: Yes
Index :Yes/No
sm
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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.8582 of 2018
DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.
sm
To
1.The District Collector,
Theni District,
Theni.
2.The District Revenue Officer,
Theni District,
Theni.
Order made in
W.P.(MD)No.8582 of 2018
Dated:
15.11.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
