Madras High Court
Kasper vs The Superintending Engineer ( O & ... on 7 April, 2022
W.A.No.499 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 07.04.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA
W.A.No. 499 of 2022 and
C.M.P.Nos.3599, 3600 & 3601 of 2022
Kasper ... Appellant/Petitioner
-vs-
1. The Superintending Engineer ( O & M),
Nagapattinam Electricity Distribution Circle,
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd,
Sattaiyappar East Street,
Nagappattinam:611 001.
2. The Executive Engineer ( O & M),
Sirkali Division,
Nagappatinam Electricity Distribution Circle,
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd,
Tenpathi, Sirkali: 609 110.
3. M/s.Indus Towers Ltd,
ESPEE, I.T.PART,
5 (N.P.), 5th Floor,
Jawaharlal Nehru Road,
Ekkattuthangal, Chennai:600 032.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.499 of 2022
4. Mr.Aneesh .... Respondents/Respondents
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside the Impugned
order passed in W.P.No.24652 of 2021 Dated:18.11.2021.
For Appellant : Mr.Chandrasekar P
For Respondents : Mr.P.Subramanian (R1 & R2)
for TNEB
*****
JUDGMENT
S.VAIDYANATHAN.,J
and
N.MALA.,J
The Present Writ Appeal has been preferred against the order of the learned
Single Judge dated 18.11.2021, in dismissing the Writ Petition on the ground that it is
premature.
2. The case of the Appellant/Writ Petitioner is that he was working as a Inspector
of Assessment and was issued with an order dated 22.10.2021, directing the Appellant
to pay a sum of Rs.2,44,420/-, towards alleged wrong collection made against the
Demand Draft issued by the Third Respondent. The grievance of the Writ Petitioner is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.499 of 2022
that without issuing any formal charge sheet or conducting any departmental enquiry,
straightaway the aforesaid order was passed directing him to pay a huge amount thereby
concluding the guilt of the Writ Petitioner. Hence, he made a representation to the 1st
and the 2nd Respondents on 30.10.2021, to provide him a reasonable opportunity to
prove his innocence. Since no action was taken on the said representation, the
Appellant/Writ Petitioner has filed the Writ Petition in W.P.No.24652 of 2021, seeking
to quash the order dated 22.10.2021 and for a consequential direction to the
Respondents to conduct proper enquiry as per the guidelines issued by the management
and extend the opportunity to the Petitioner to defend his innocence.
3. The learned Single Judge vide order dated 18.11.2021 dismissed the Writ
Petition on the ground that the Writ Petition could not be entertained at this stage as
being premature. Feeling aggrieved, the present Writ Appeal has been filed.
4. When the matter was taken up for hearing on 14.03.2022, the learned Standing
Counsel appearing for the Electricity Board across the bar submitted that the
subsistence allowance admissible, will be paid to the Appellant.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.499 of 2022
5. Today, when is matter is taken up, it is represented by Mr.P.Subramanian,
learned counsel appearing for the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board that the Writ Petitioner
is soley responsible for the incident and that the amount involved are in crores, He
further submitted that Charge Memo has now been issued to the Appellant and
subsistence allowance has also been paid to him.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the Appellant/Writ Petitioner submitted that
the similarly placed persons have not been suspended and the Writ Petitioner alone has
been suspended for no fault on him. He further submitted that the Petitioner is innocent
and no way connected with the offence and he is ready and willing to co-operate for the
enquiry and prays for revocation of the suspension order.
7. Heard both sides. Perused the records.
8. In the light of the Full Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of P.Kannan
Vs. The Commissioner for Municipal Administration and Others (W.P.Nos.2165 of
2015 and 21628 of 2018 dated 15.03.2022) it is for the employer to decide whether to
suspend the employee or not and to revoke the suspension. We are of the view that it is
mandatory for the employer to proceed with the enquiry as non conduction of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.499 of 2022
Disciplinary Proceedings would result in favourable order to the delinquent on technical
ground. For example, witness may die, witness cannot remember the events or would
not like to come to depose etc.,.
9. However, this Court taking note of the submissions of both sides,without
interfering with the order of the learned Single Judge, direct the Respondents to proceed
with the enquiry and the Appellant/Writ Petitioner shall co-operate for the enquiry
without prolonging the same and the enquiry shall be conducted on a day-to-day basis
without adjourning the matter beyond five working days at any point of time and bring
the issue to a logical end, preferably within a period of four months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order. In case any of the documents are with the police
officials, certified xerox copies of the same can be obtained and produce the same in the
enquiry.
10. This Writ Appeal is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently,
connected M.P.'s are closed.
[S.V.N., J.,] [N.M., J]
07.04.2022
Index: Yes / No
Internet: Yes / No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.499 of 2022
arr
To
1. The Superintending Engineer ( O & M),
Nagapattinam Electricity Distribution Circle,
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd,
Sattaiyappar East Street,
Nagappattinam:611 001.
2. The Executive Engineer ( O & M),
Sirkali Division,
Nagappatinam Electricity Distribution Circle,
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd,
Tenpathi, Sirkali: 609 110.
3. M/s.Indus Towers Ltd,
ESPEE, I.T.PART,
5 (N.P.), 5th Floor,
Jawaharlal Nehru Road,
Ekkattuthangal, Chennai:600 032.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.499 of 2022
S. VAIDYANATHAN,J.,
and
N.MALA,J
arr
W.A.No.499 of 2022
07.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
