Madras High Court
The State Of Tamil Nadu vs K.Baskar on 13 October, 2022
W.A.No.2291 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 13.10.2022
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice PARESH UPADHYAY
and
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
W.A.No.2291 of 2022
and C.M.P.No.17474 of 2022
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep., by its Principal Secretary to Government,
Revenue & Disaster Management Department,
Secretariat, Fort St. George,
Chennai-600 009.
2.The Commissioner of Revenue Administration,
Chepauk, Chennai-600 005.
3.The District Collector,
Krishnagiri District,
Krishnagiri. .. Appellants
Vs.
K.Baskar .. Respondent
Appeal preferred under Clause XV of Letters Patent against the
order dated 19.12.2019 in W.P.No.32583 of 2017.
For Appellants : Mr.S.Silambanan,
Additional Advocate General
assisted by
Mrs.Geetha Thamaraiselvam,
Special Government Pleader
1 Of 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2291 of 2022
For respondent : Mr.R.Singaravelu, Senior Counsel
for Mr.M.Marudhachalam
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by PARESH UPADHYAY, J.)
1. Challenge in this appeal is made to the order dated
19.12.2019 recorded on W.P.No.32583 of 2017. This appeal is by
the State Authorities - respondents in writ petition.
2. The writ petitioner had challenged the suspension dated
28.11.2017 pending departmental enquiry. Learned single Judge,
by an order dated 19.12.2019 while setting aside the suspension
order, has permitted the State to give posting to the writ petitioner
on any non-sensitive post. The State is aggrieved by this.
3. Learned Additional Advocate General for the State
Authorities has submitted that, the charge against the writ
petitioner is so grave that, even the reinstatement on non-sensitive
post ought not to have been ordered by learned Single Judge. He
has also attempted to take this Court through the pleadings on
record. On being asked, what is the date of the Enquiry Officer's
2 Of 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2291 of 2022
Final Report, it is replied that, it is 30.05.2018. On further being
asked, on which date the said report was made available to the writ
petitioner, he has tried to ascertain from the officers present in the
Court but even after reasonable time, he is not in a position to reply
to this. When it is the case of the Government itself that, the
enquiry was completed and Report was drawn as back as on
30.05.2018 and impugned order of the learned single Judge is also
dated 19.12.2019, we find that any interference in the order of
learned Single Judge will only add to the arbitrariness on the part of
the State to keep the matter pending. At this stage, we also take
note of the policy of the State as contained in G.O.No.81 dated
04.08.2022 wherein it is resolved that, the suspension should not
be continued for long. In totality, we find no interference is
required in the impugned order.
4. This appeal is dismissed. No costs. Connected civil
miscellaneous petition would not survive.
(P.U.,J.) (D.B.C.,J.)
13.10.2022
Index:No
raa/10
3 Of 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2291 of 2022
PARESH UPADHYAY, J.
and
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
raa
W.A.No.2291 of 2022
13.10.2022
4 Of 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
