Madras High Court
S.Baskaran vs The Board Of Tamil Nadu Co-Operative ... on 6 December, 2023
W.P.No.12937 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 06.12.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
W.P.No.12937 of 2021 and
W.M.P.No.13739 of 2021
S.Baskaran ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Board of Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk
Producers Federation Limited,
Aavin Illam,
3A, Pasumpon Muthuramanlingam Salai,
Nandanam, Chennai 600 035.
2.The Personnel Committee,
Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk
Producers Federation Limited,
Nandanam, Chennai 600 035.
3.The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk
Producers Federation Limited,
Nandanam, Chennai 600 035. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records
of the proceedings in reference No.15350/Pers/IR3/2016 dated
23.01.2018 on the file of the 2nd respondent and appeal proceedings
reference No.3286/Pers/IR.3/2016 dated 26.04.2021 on the file of the 3rd
respondent and quash that portion of order treating the period of
Page No.1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.12937 of 2021
suspension from 13.11.2016 to 11.06.2017 as leave days and direct the
respondents 1 to 3 to treat the suspension period as on duty days and
thereby directing the respondents to accept the surrender of gained leave
and disperse eligible payment which is accrued to the petitioner for the
same.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.K.S.Bharathy Shri
For Respondents : Mr.T.Chezhiyan, AGP
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking issuance of a Writ of
Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the proceedings in
reference No.15350/Pers/IR3/2016 dated 23.01.2018 on the file of the
2nd respondent and appeal proceedings reference
No.3286/Pers/IR.3/2016 dated 26.04.2021 on the file of the 3rd
respondent and quash that portion of order treating the period of
suspension from 13.11.2016 to 11.06.2017 as leave days and direct the
respondents 1 to 3 to treat the suspension period as on duty days and
thereby direct the respondents to accept the surrender of gained leave and
disperse eligible payment which is accrued to the petitioner for the same.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2. Heard Mr.T.K.S.Bharathy Shri, learned counsel for the petitioner
and Mr.T.Chezhiyan, learned Additional Government Pleader for the
respondents.
3. The limited prayer of the petitioner for filing this Writ Petition is
to treat his period of suspension between the period from 13.11.2016 to
11.06.2017 as duty period. The petitioner who was working as an
employee of Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk Producers Federation
Limited, has been given with certain charges for which he was subjected
to disciplinary proceedings. At the conclusion of the disciplinary
proceedings he was warned and let off. However the period of suspension
has been treated as leave for which he is eligible. The petitioner has filed
an appeal challenging the above order and that was also dismissed.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner was not found guilty for any of the substantial charges. Even
for the partial proof of charges he was given with only warning and no
punishment and hence the period for which he was under suspension
should be treated as duty. The attention of this Court was drawn to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
rule regarding treatment of period of suspension. Rule 6 of Tamil Nadu
Co-operative Milk Producers' Federation Employees (Conduct, Discipline
& Appeal) Rules was extracted hereunder:
"6. Treatment of the period of suspension:
(i) When the suspension of an employee is held
to be unjustified or not wholly justified, or when an
employee who has been dismissed removed or
suspended is reinstated, by the disciplinary, appellate
or reviewing authority have the case may be whose
decision shall be final, such authority may grant to him
for the period of absence from duty --
(a) If he is honorably acquitted the full pay and
allowance to which he would have been entitled if he
had not been dismissed, removed or suspended unless
the subsistence allowance granted.
(b) In any other case, such proportion of pay
and allowance as the disciplinary, appellate or
reviewing authority may specify.
(ii) In a case falling under Clause (a) of Sub
Rule (i), the period of absence from duty will be
treated as period spent on duty and in a case falling
under clause (b) the period of absence will not be
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
treated as a period spent on duty unless the
disciplinary, appellate or reviewing authority as the
case may be whose decision shall be final, so directs."
By reading the above rule, the learned counsel for the petitioner
submitted that the petitioner has not been dismissed or removed from
service and was not given with any major punishment even minor
punishment and hence the appropriate authority ought to have considered
the period of suspension as duty and not as leave.
5. So far as the above rule is concerned, it speaks about treating
the period of absence due to suspension at the time when the employee
was dismissed, removed or suspended or is reinstated. The above rule
speaks about the stages at which the employee's suspension period
should be regularised. In case, a person is honourably acquitted, his
period of suspension would entitle him to get the entire pay and
allowance as though he had not been dismissed or removed from service.
In any other case, such proportion of pay and allowance as the
disciplinary, appellate, reviewing authority may specify.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
6. But even in case of the persons who have got honourable
acquittal, the period of absence from duty has to be treated as period
spent on duty. However in any other case, the period of absence will not
be treated as period spent on duty, unless the appropriate authority
decides so. So the case of the petitioner would fall under Rule 6 (i)(b)
and not 6(i)(a).
7. In case a person who is charged with a criminal offence is
dismissed or removed from service before the judgment is delivered by
the Criminal Court, he will be loosing the pay and allowance minus
subsistence allowance for all those period for which he was kept under
suspension. If the case ends in acquittal and in which the employee
concerned has been acquitted honourably, then he will be entitled to get
pay and allowance by considering the period of absence as duty period.
In other cases, it is in the discretion of the appropriate authority to treat
the period under suspension as duty or otherwise. It is because even if the
appointing authority chooses to treat the period of suspension as leave,
the employee will be entitled to pay and allowance and there will not be
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
any loss in terms of monetary benefit. So the above rule cannot be
construed in such a way that the appropriate / disciplinary / appellate /
reviewing authority does not have any power at all to treat the period of
suspension as otherwise other than on duty, in case the employee is given
with any other punishment other than dismissal or removal or even let off
with warning.
8. In view of the above stated reasons, this Writ Petition is
dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is
closed.
06.12.2023
Index : Yes
Internet : Yes/No
gsk
R.N.MANJULA, J.
gsk
To
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1.The Board of Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk
Producers Federation Limited,
Aavin Illam,
3A, Pasumpon Muthuramanlingam Salai,
Nandanam, Chennai 600 035.
2.The Personnel Committee,
Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk
Producers Federation Limited,
Nandanam, Chennai 600 035.
W.P.No.12937 of 2021 and
3.The Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu Co-operative Milk
Producers Federation Limited,
Nandanam, Chennai 600 035.
06.12.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
