Madras High Court
R.Ravi … vs The Managing Director on 4 February, 2025
W.P. No. 27113 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.02.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE Ms. JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
W.P. No. 27113 of 2018
R.Ravi … Petitioner
-vs-
1. The Managing Director
Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd.
Head Office, CMDA Tower II
IV Floor, Gandhi Irwin Road
Egmore, Chennai-600008.
2. The Senior Regional Manager
Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd.
Salem-16.
3. The District Manager
Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd.
Namakkal. ... Respondents
Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
1950, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
records from the first respondent through the proceedings in Se.Mu.Na.Ka. No.
R1/31046/2016 dated 17.11.2016 that confirming the order of the second
respondent in Se.Mu.No.4290/2015/A dated 06.11.2015 and the order of the
third respondent in Se.Mu.Na.Ka.No. 2415/B1/CV/2014 dated 01.04.2015 and
quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents herein to reinstate the
petitioner with all consequential and attendant benefits.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
W.P. No. 27113 of 2018
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar
For Respondents : Mr.M.Sekar, SC for TASMAC
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed by challenging the order of the first
respondent in Se.Mu.Na.Ka. No. R1/31046/2016 dated 17.11.2016.
2. Heard Mr.S.Vinoth Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr.M.Sekar, learned Standing Counsel for the TASMAC and perused the
materials placed on record, apart from the pleadings of the parties.
3. The petitioner was working as a Salesman with the third respondent
Corporation. While he was in duty on 20.09.2014, the respondent visited the
shop on surprise inspection and seized 2 number of day night Brandy 180 ml
bottles, which were containing 90 ml only. Subsequently on 27.10.2014, the
third respondent had suspended the petitioner from service. Thereafter, a charge
memo was issued and an enquiry was conducted and then the petitioner was
dismissed from service. The appeal filed before the second respondent was also
dismissed. Thereafter, a revision petition was filed before the first respondent
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
was also dismissed. Now the petitioner has filed this writ petition.
4. The petitioner submitted that he will not commit any kind of
irregularities in future and in the event of his reinstatement, he will not claim
any backwages and any other monetary benefits from the respondent
Corporation. He relies on the order of this Court in P.Balaji -vs- The Senior
Regional Manager, TASMAC, Salem Region, Salem [Order made in
W.P.No.14250 to 14252 of 2019 on 30.07.2019]. In the said judgment, it is
held as under:-
“2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is represented
by the respondent-Corporation that the issue raised in these
writ petitions has already been considered and decided by this
Court on 02.04.2019 in W.P. No.28574 of 2014. The relevant
portion of the said order reads as follows:-
“6. At this juncture, the learned Standing Counsel
appearing for the TASMAC, would submit that by
recording the undertaking affidavit of the petitioner dated
21.03.2019, necessary orders may be passed.
7. In view of the above submissions and also considering
the fact that while passing impugned order, the Authority
concerned did not take note off the denial made by the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
petitioner against the allegations, and that taking note of
the affidavit of undertaking filed by the petitioner, dated
21.03.2019, this Court is inclined to pass the following
order:-
(i) the impugned dismissal order passed by the third
respondent, dated 30.09.2013 which was also
confirmed by the second respondent, dated 31.07.2017
are liable to be set aside, accordingly they are set
aside;
(ii) The third respondent is directed to reinstate the
petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date
of receipt of a copy of this order.
(iii) It is made clear that the petitioner is not entitled
for any backwages and any other monetary benefits
during the period of break-in-service, as per his
undertaking affidavit dated 21.03.2019, i.e., from the
date of suspension till the date of the order to be
passed by the third respondent.””
5. Considering the fact that the petitioner is also similarly placed, as the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
person in the above writ petition, this writ petition is disposed by setting aside
the order of the dismissal passed in Se.Mu.Na.Ka. No. R1/31046/2016 dated
17.11.2016 of the first respondent and the respondent concerned is directed to
reinstate the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of
a copy of this order. It is made clear that the petitioner is not entitled for any
backwages and also other monetary benefits during the period in which he was
out of service. No costs.
04.02.2025
Index: Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
Speaking /Non-speaking order
Maya
To
1. The Managing Director
Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd.
Head Office, CMDA Tower II
IV Floor, Gandhi Irwin Road
Egmore, Chennai-600008.
2. The Senior Regional Manager
Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd.
Salem-16.
3. The District Manager
Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd.
Namakkal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
R.N.MANJULA, J.
Maya
Dated : 04.02.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
