Madras High Court
Selvaraj vs The Principal Secretary To The ... on 20 January, 2022
W.P(MD)No.1556 of 2015
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 20.01.2022
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY
W.P(MD).No.1556 of 2015
Selvaraj ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Principal Secretary to the Government,
Department of Home,
Fort St.George,
Chennai.
2.The Director General of Police,
Radha Krishna Salai,
Chepauk, Chennai.
3.The Commissioner of Police,
Madurai City,
Madurai.
4.The Deputy Commissioner of Police,
Armed Reserve Police,
Madurai City,
Madurai. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to
issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating
to the impugned order passed by the first respondent in G.O.(2D)No.412
dated 20.11.2014 confirming the revision order passed by the second
respondent in R.C.No.11390/AP2 (3)/ 2009 dated 13.03.2009 continuing
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/7
W.P(MD)No.1556 of 2015
the punishment order passed in PR 247/2005 dated 28.05.2007 by the
fourth respondent quash the same and consequently direct the
respondents to disburse all other consequential service and monetary
benefits to the petitioner within the stipulated time.
For Petitioner : Mr.S,Chellapandian
For Respondents : Mr.N.Ramesh Arumugam
Government Advocate (Civil Side)
ORDER
The petitioner is appointed as Grade I Police Constable in the year
1999. Now, he is working as Head Constable at Teppakulam Police
Station. The petitioner was suspended on 13.06.2005. The memo was
issued on 23.08.2005 alleging two charges. The first charge is he has
harassed his wife demanding dowry and further attempted to murder her
by pouring kerosene on her body with the aid of his aunt. The second
charge is illicit intimacy with another Police woman who is serving in the
armed Reserve Police.
2. A criminal complaint was registered against the petitioner in
Crime No.20 of 2005 under Seciton 307, 498 (A) 406 of IPC and 3 and 4
of Dowry Prohibition Act, based on the complaint given by his ex wife
namely Ponmani. Thereafter, the petitioner was arrested on 12.06.2005
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.1556 of 2015
and was remanded, the petitioner was placed under suspension until
23.06.2006 followed by departmental enquiry. In the enquiry, charge 1
was proved and the second charge was disproved. Enquiry report was
served to the petitioner on 12.07.2006. In the mean time, the petitioner
was reinstated in the service on 20.03.2006. The petitioner submitted an
explanation, the fourth respondent imposed a punishment of reduction in
times scale of pay in two stages for the period of two years without
cumulative effect. In the mean time, the Criminal Case was registered
against the petitioner and the case was ended in acquittal vide order
dated 06.09.2008. The petitioner preferred representation to reconsider
the punishment order in the light of the judgment, the same was
dismissed. Aggrieved over the petitioner has preferred this writ petition.
3. The respondents filed a counter stating that the petitioner has
not preferred any appeal however preferred review petition through the
Director General of Police. The petitioner preferred W.P.(MD).No.3114
of 2014 requesting to dispose of the review petition dated 26.11.2012.
This Court vide order dated 24.02.2014 directed the respondents to pass
an order within a period of three months. Thereafter the respondents have
considered the review petition and rejected the petition in G.O (2D) No.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.1556 of 2015
412 Home (Police VI) Department dated 20.11.2014. The Government
has considered and pass an order after considering his grounds and there
is no infirmity in the order. In criminal case the wife turned hostile and
the case ended up in acquittal. In criminal case strict evidence is
necessary. But in disciplinary proceedings it is enough if there is
preponderance of probability. Therefore considering the evidence on
record, the punishment was imposed.
4. Heard the learned Counsel for both the sides and perused the
materials on record.
5. The allegation against the petitioner is dowry harassment. The
petition was preferred by his wife before the police. In criminal case, the
petitioner's wife turn hostile. Therefore, the criminal Court acquitted the
petitioner. Considering all these things, the punishment imposed of
reduction time scale of pay is disappropriate and hitting the conscious of
the Court.
6. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view the punishment
shall be modified as stoppage of increment for two years without
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.1556 of 2015
cumulative effect. Therefore, this court directing the respondents to
modify the punishment as the stoppage of increment for two years
without cumulative effect and implement the same within a period of six
weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
7. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No
costs.
20.01.2022
sn
Index :Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
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.1556 of 2015
To
1.The Principal Secretary to the Government,
Department of Home,
Fort St.George,
Chennai.
2.The Director General of Police,
Radha Krishna Salai,
Chepauk, Chennai.
3.The Commissioner of Police,
Madurai City,
Madurai.
4.The Deputy Commissioner of Police,
Armed Reserve Police,
Madurai City,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.1556 of 2015
S.SRIMATHY, J.
sn
W.P(MD)No.1556 of 2015
20.01.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
