Madras High Court
P.Pitchappa vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 15 June, 2023
W.P.(MD).No.940 of 2016
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 15.06.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY
W.P.(MD).No.940 of 2016
P.Pitchappa ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Government of Tamil Nadu,
Represented by its Chief Secretary to Government,
Public (Special.A) Department,
Secretariat,
Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Government of Tamil Nadu,
Represented by its Secretary to Government,
Revenue (Ser.I) Department,
Secretariat,
Chennai – 600 009.
3.The Additional Chief Secretary /
Commissioner of Revenue Administration,
Chepauk,
Chennai – 600 005.
4.The District Revenue Officer,
Virudhunagar District,
Virudhunagar.
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.940 of 2016
5.G.Sampath
6.The Principal Accountant General,
(A & E) of Tamil Nadu,
361, Anna Salai,
Teynampet,
Chennai – 600 018. ... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the
records relating to the punishment order No.Na.Ka.A.5/40456/2008 dated
02.02.2012 passed by the fourth respondent (singed on 21.05.2015) and the
consequential order No.2484/A4/2014-7 dated 18.07.2015 passed by the first
respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent to
promote the petitioner as District Revenue officer from 08.03.2013 on par with
the petitioner's junior i.e. fifth respondent and grant all the service, monetary
and revised pensionary benefits and further direct the third respondent to repay
Rs.8,892/- collected from the petitioner as punishment amount (increment
benefit for 6 months) within a time limit to be fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Thirumurthy,
For M/s.Victory Associates.
For R-1 to R-4 : Mr.M.Lingadurai,
Special Government Pleader.
For R-6 : Mr.P.Gunasekaran,
Standing Counsel.
2/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.940 of 2016
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed to quash the order dated 02.02.2012 (singed on
21.05.2015) and the consequential order dated 18.07.2015 and consequently
direct the respondents to promote the petitioner as District Revenue officer
from 08.03.2013 on par with the petitioner's junior i.e. fifth respondent and
grant all the service, monetary and revised pensionary benefits and further
direct the third respondent to repay Rs.8,892/- collected from the petitioner as
punishment amount (increment benefit for 6 months).
2. The petitioner was appointed in the respondent service as Junior
Assistant on 25.01.1980. The contention of the petitioner is that he was falsely
implicated in the charge by issuing legalheir certificate without verifying the
proper records. Thereafter, the respondents have conducted enquiry. The
petitioner has also submitted his explanation on 28.01.2008. Since the
petitioner has not received any further communication from the respondents,
the petitioner was under impression that the explanation was accepted and the
show cause notice dated 30.11.2007 was dropped. In the meanwhile, the
petitioner's name was dropped from the promotional panel of Deputy Collectors
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.940 of 2016
for the year 2008-2009 and 2009-2010, due to pendency of Rule 17(b) charges.
On 15.06.2010, the petitioner submitted representation to include the his name
in the panel for the year 2008-2009 and the same was recommended by the
District Collector on 23.06.2010. Pending Writ Petition, the petitioner's name
was included in the panel for the year 2010-2011 and the petitioner was
promoted as Deputy Collector on 16.02.2011 itself which is a State Level
Category and posted as the District Backward Classes and Minorities Welfare
Officer, Krishnagiri. Subsequent, the promotional panel of District Revenue
Officer for the year 2012 was communicated in G.O.Ms.No.108 Public
(Special-A) Department dated 29.12.2012. But the petitioner's name was not
included in the panel, whereas the petitioner's junior who is the fifth respondent
herein was included in Serial No.32 and promoted as District Revenue Officer
on 08.03.2013. When the Deputy Collector panel was under consideration, the
petitioner actually lost 4 years due to pendency of 17(b) charges. But
subsequently all the 17(b) charges are dropped and the petitioner relieved from
the charge. When the subsequent panel was under consideration, again the
respondents have dropped the petitioner's name from the panel for promotion.
Hence, the petitioner aggrieved over the non granting of promotion is now
before this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.940 of 2016
3. The respondents have filed a counter stating that the petitioner was
facing disciplinary proceedings and the petitioner was imposed with the
punishment of stoppage of increment for six months without cumulative effect
vide order dated 02.02.2012. The crucial date for the preparation of the panel
for the post of District Revenue Officer for the year 2012 is 01.04.2012. Since
the petitioner was imposed with the punishment and due to currency of
punishment, the petitioner was not considered for promotion. Hence, the
respondents prayed to dismiss this Writ Petition.
4. Heard learned counsel on all sides and perused the records.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner was under impression after issuance of show cause notice dated
30.11.2007, the petitioner had submitted his explanation on 28.02.2008,
thereafter the respondents have not passed any order. Therefore, the petitioner
was under impression that the respondents have accepted the explanation and
dropped the show cause notice. But the contention of the respondents is that
the respondents after considering the explanation has passed an order dated
02.02.2012 imposing the punishment of stoppage of increment for six months
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.940 of 2016
without cumulative effect. Since there is a currency of punishment, the
respondents have not included the same. But on perusal of the impugned order,
it is seen that the respondents have drafted the order but not issued the order.
On verifying the signature, it is seen that the respondents have signed the order
on 21.05.2015 and issued the same to the petitioner on 30.04.2015. The
learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that any order of
punishment will come into effect on the date of serving to the delinquent. It is
an accepted proposition, any order will come into effect from the date of
serving to the concerned person. In the present case, since it has been served
on the petitioner on 30.04.2015, the petitioner has received the same on the date
of superannuation that is on 30.04.2015. Therefore, the currency of punishment
is started from 30.04.2015 only. Hence, this will not be a impediment for
considering the petitioner's name for the promotional year 2012. Since as on
the date of crucial date that is on 01.04.2012, the petitioner was not undergoing
any punishment, the petitioner is entitled to notional promotion. The next
contention of the petitioner is that the currency of punishment starts from
30.04.2015 but as on the date of 30.04.2015, the petitioner has attained
superannuation. Therefore, the punishment will becomes unimplementable
order. That is why the respondents have collected Rs.8892/- from the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.940 of 2016
petitioner. Therefore, the respondents cannot collect the amount, since it has
become an unimplementable order.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further relied on the
judgment rendered in AIR 1966 Supreme Court 1313 (V 53 C253) and the
relevant portion is extracted hereunder:
“In our opinion, therefore, the High Court was plainly right
in holding that the order of dismissal passed against the
respondent on the 3rd June 1949 could not be said to have
taken effect until the respondent came to know about it on
the 28th May 1951”.
7. Therefore, the impugned orders are quashed. The respondents are
directed to confer promotion as District Revenue Officer to the petitioner with
consequential monetary and attendant benefits attached to the said post. The
said exercise shall be completed within a period of eight (8) weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.940 of 2016
8. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no
order as to costs.
15.06.2023
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
Nsr
To
1.The Principal Secretary,
The State of Tamil Nadu,
School Education Department,
Secretariat,
Chennai.
2.The Accountant General,
O/o. the Accountant General (Accounts & Entitlements),
361, Anna Salai,
Teynampet,
Chennai – 600 018.
3.The Director of School Education,
O/o. the Director of School Education,
D.P.I.Complex,
College Road,
Chennai – 6.
4.The Chief Educational Officer,
O/o. the Chief Educational Office,
Collectorate Campus,
Ramanathapuram,
Ramanathapuram District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.940 of 2016
S.SRIMATHY, J.
Nsr
W.P.(MD).No.940 of 2016
15.06.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
