Madras High Court
R.Murugesan vs The Regional Manager on 5 October, 2021
W.P(MD)No.16867 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 05.10.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
W.P(MD)No.16867 of 2021
R.Murugesan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Regional Manager,
Central Bank of India,
Regional Office,
No.39/40, Work Shop Road,
Madurai – 625 001.
2.The Branch Manager,
Central Bank of India,
Muthulapuram Branch (Code No.2647),
Theni District. ... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating
to the impugned order of dismissal by the 1st respondent in his proceedings in
R.O/STAFF/DAD/97-98/1835, dated 19.01.1998 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ramasamy
For Respondents : Mr.N.Dilip Kumar
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/6
W.P(MD)No.16867 of 2021
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned order passed
by the second respondent dated 19.01.1998.
2. According to the petitioner, he was joined in the second respondent
bank as a Peon and while he was working in the second respondent bank, a
criminal case was registered against the petitioner in Crime No.11/1997, for the
offences under Sections 468, 471 and 409 of IPC and the same was taken on
file in C.C.No.542 of 2012 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Theni. Hence,
the petitioner was dismissed from service by the first respondent vide impugned
dismissal order dated 19.01.1998. After full fledged trial, the trial Court
acquitted the petitioner from all the charges by judgment dated 27.02.2019.
Thereafter, the petitioner made a representation on 29.04.2019, requesting the
respondent to revoke the order of suspension by citing the judgment of acquittal
by the trial Court. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he was
acquitted from the criminal case, the second respondent has not revoked the
order of suspension. Hence, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned
Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent bank.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)No.16867 of 2021
4. On a perusal of the impugned order, it is seen that the first respondent
has passed the impugned dismissal order as early as on 19.01.1998. As against
the said order, the petitioner has not preferred any appeal. Now, after the period
of 23 years, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition, challenging the said
impugned order of dismissal.
5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of the Regional Manager, A.P
SRTC Vs. N.Sathyanarayana and others reported in 2008 (1) SCC 210, has
held as follows:
"10. Even a bare reading of paragraph-18 of the judgment on
which reliance has been placed by the learned Single Judge and
the Division Bench, it is clear that the relief was moulded to avoid
anomalies and in view of the peculiar situation involved. This
Court categorically held that the orders impugned in the appeals
were not sustainable because the writ petitions were filed after a
long lapse of time. Similar is the position here. The regularization
was done w.e.f. 1.8.1987 and the writ petitions were filed in the
year 1999. That being so and since in the writ petition without any
explanation has been offered for the delayed approach, writ
petition should have been dismissed on the ground of delay and
laches."
6. In the light of the said judgment, this Court is of the view that after a
period of 23 years the petitioner cannot challenge the impugned order of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)No.16867 of 2021
dismissal passed by the first respondent dated 19.01.1998. Hence, this Writ
Petition is liable to rejected on the ground of delay and laches.
In fine, this Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.
05.10.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)No.16867 of 2021
To:
1.The Regional Manager,
Central Bank of India,
Regional Office,
No.39/40, Work Shop Road,
Madurai – 625 001.
2.The Branch Manager,
Central Bank of India,
Muthulapuram Branch (Code No.2647),
Theni District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)No.16867 of 2021
D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.
vsm
W.P(MD)No.16867 of 2021
05.10.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
