Madras High Court
J.Janakiraman vs The Assistant Director Of Survey ... on 25 March, 2022
W.P.No.5400 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 25.03.2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
W.P.No.5400 of 2022
J.Janakiraman .. Petitioner
vs.
The Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records,
Chepauk, Chennai, .. Respondent
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the
records on the file of the respondent in Re.A5/0081/2020 dated 07.01.2020
and to quash the same and to issue consequential directions to the respondent
to reinstate the petitioner in service subject to the outcome of
Cr.No.01/Ac/2020/CC-II, in the Court of Special Judge for Cases under the
Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018, Chennai.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Dharani
For Respondent : Mr.Haja Nazirudeen,
Additional Advocate General
for Mrs.S.Anitha, Special Govt. Pleader
ORDER
By consent, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal. The
petitioner, challenging the impugned suspension order passed by the
respondent in Re.A5/0081/2020 dated 07.01.2020, and for a consequential
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.5400 of 2022
direction to the respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service subject to the
outcome of Cr.No.01/Ac/2020/CC-II, in the Court of Special Judge for Cases
under the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018, Chennai, has
filed the present writ petition.
2. The case of the petitioner is that on the basis of a complaint lodged
by one J.Ranson, the defacto complainant for the purpose of issuing patta in
the name of Tr.G.Sudhakar, for which the petitioner has demanded and
accepted Rs.5,000/- as illegal gratification and appeared to have committed
an offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption
(Amendment) Act, 2018. Thereafter, vide impugned order dated 07.01.2020,
the petitioner was placed under suspension with effect from 07.01.2020.
Challenging the same, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is
kept under prolonged suspension for nearly two years and the investigation in
respect of criminal case has been completed and charge sheet has been filed
in the Court of Special Judge for Trial of Cases under the Prevention of
Corruption Act, Salem and numbered as Cr.No.01/AC/2020/CC-II and the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.5400 of 2022
petitioner has also submitted a representation dated 03.01.2022 to the
respondent seeking revocation of the order of suspension and since the
representation of the petitioner did not evoke any kind of response, he has
filed the present writ petition and also prays that appropriate orders may be
passed for expeditiously disposal of the criminal case.
4. On a reference made to the two conflicting judgments rendered by
the Division Benches of this Court on a challenge to the order of suspension,
the Hon'ble Full Bench of this Court in W.P.Nos.2165 of 2015 and 21628 of
2018 dated 15.03.2022, has answered as under:
(i) The judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Ajay
Kumar Choudhary, supra, does not lay down absolute
proposition of law that an order of suspension cannot be
continued beyond the period of three months if the
memorandum of charges / charge-sheet has not been served
within three months, or if memorandum of charges/charge
-sheet is served without reasoned order of extension.
(ii) The judgment in R.Balaji, supra, has no reference to
the earlier judgments of co-equal strength and is thereby
rendered per incuriam.
(iii) The issue of challenge to the order of suspension
should be analyzed on the facts of each case, considering the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.5400 of 2022
gravity of the charges and the rules applicable.
(iv) Revocation of suspension with a direction to the
employer to post the delinquent in a non-sensitive post cannot
be endorsed or directed as a matter of course. It has to be based
on the facts of each case and after noticing the reason for the
delay in serving the memorandum of charges/charge-sheet.
5. The learned Additional Advocate General for the respondent
submitted that the representation submitted by the petitioner for revocation of
the suspension order will be considered by the authorities concerned.
6. In view of the above, this Court directs the respondent to consider
the petitioner's representation dated 03.01.2022 seeking revocation of the
suspension order and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law
within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order. The learned Special Judge for Cases under the Prevention of
Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018 is also directed to expedite the trial in
Cr.No.01/AC/2020/CC-II pending on its file and pass judgment on the same,
as expeditiously as possible.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.5400 of 2022
7. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No
costs.
25.03.2022
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
Jvm
To
The Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records,
Chepauk, Chennai.
Copy to:
The Special Judge for Cases under the Prevention of Corruption
(Amendment) Act, 2018, Chennai
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.5400 of 2022
D.KRISHNAKUMAR. J
Jvm
W.P.No.5400 of 2022
25.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
