Madras High Court
S.Rathika vs The District Elementary ... on 11 September, 2023
WP.No.26498 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 11.09.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
WP.No.26498 of 2023
and W.M.P.Nos.25902 & 25903 of 2023
S.Rathika .. Petitioner
Versus
1.The District Elementary Educational Officer
Salem District, Salem
2.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer
Veerapandi
Salem District, Salem
3.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer
Athur Union, Salem District .. Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records
relating to the impugned order of the 1st respondent issued in
Na.Ka.No.0598/A3/2022 dated 19.08.2023 and quash the same and
consequently direct the respondents to treat the entire period of suspension
from 15.06.2011 to 23.09.2011 and from 11.06.2024 to 31.03.2015 as duty and
to direct the respondents to claim salary for the above said period and paid to
the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Ranganathan
For Respondents : Mr.P.Baladhandayutham
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Special Government Pleader
1/6
WP.No.26498 of 2023
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order in
Na.Ka.No.0598/A3/2022 dated 19.08.2023 on the ground of delay in
furnishing the copies of the enquiry report to the petitioner.
2. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that on
earlier occasion, a writ petition has been filed in W.P.No.32404 of 2017,
challenging the punishment. This Court, vide Order dated 27.10.2022 allowed
the writ petition by setting aside the punishment and directed the respondent to
furnish the copies of the enquiry report to the petitioner within a period of four
weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that order and thereafter, directed
the respondents to pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law as
expeditiously as possible.
3. The grievance of the writ petitioner is that the Order has been passed
on 27.10.2022 with a direction to furnish the copies of the enquiry report to
the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy
of that order, now, the enquiry report has been furnished after a period of eight
months delay. Therefore, according to him, the entire order has to be set aside
and he also placed much reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of The Commissioner, Karnataka vs. C.Muddaiah reported in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.No.26498 of 2023
(2007) 7 SCC 689, wherein, paragraph 31 reads as follows:
"...31. We are of the considered opinion that once a direction is
issued by a competent Court, it has to be obeyed and
implemented without any reservation. If an order passed by a
Court of Law is not complied with or is ignored, there will be an
end of Rule of Law. If a party against whom such order is made
has grievance, the only remedy available to him is to challenge
the order by taking appropriate proceedings known to law. But it
cannot be made ineffective by not complying with the directions
on a specious plea that no such directions could have been issued
by the Court. In our judgment, upholding of such argument would
result in chaos and confusion and would seriously affect and
impair administration of justice. The argument of the Board,
therefore, has no force and must be rejected. "
4. Heard both sides and perused the materials placed on record. This
Court, in fact, earlier quashed the disciplinary proceedings and directed the
first respondent to furnish the copies within a period of four weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of that Order. Now, in compliance of the Order,
enquiry report has been furnished on 19.08.2023. It is the contention of the
learned counsel for the petitioner that there is a delay in furnishing the enquiry
report and as the direction is not complied, the entire proceedings has to be
quashed.
5. This Court, at this stage is unable to comprehend the submissions of
the learned counsel. What has been directed is only to furnish the enquiry
report within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.No.26498 of 2023
order. When the order copy has been received by the respondent, absolutely,
there is no evidence at this stage. Therefore, even assuming that there is delay
in furnishing the copy that cannot be a ground to quash the entire proceedings.
6. This Court, has, in fact, granted liberty to the petitioner to submit
explanation on the basis of the enquiry report, so that the principles of natural
justice sought to be complied. Such view of the matter, even assuming that
there is a delay in furnishing the copy, the same will not vitiate the
proceedings. Accordingly, I do not find any merits in the case to quash the
impugned order. The judgment relied by the learned counsel for the petitioner,
on facts, is totally different to this case and that cannot be applied
mechanically.
7. In view of the above, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
11.09.2023
dhk
Index:Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.No.26498 of 2023
To
1.The District Elementary Educational Officer
Salem District, Salem
2.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer
Veerapandi
Salem District, Salem
3.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer
Athur Union, Salem District
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP.No.26498 of 2023
dhk
W.P.No.26498 of 2023
11.09.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
