Madras High Court
The Management Of vs C.Arokiyasamy ...1St on 3 March, 2025
Author: G.Jayachandran
Bench: G.Jayachandran
W.A(MD)No.416 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 03.03.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.POORNIMA
W.A(MD)No.416 of 2025
and
C.M.P(MD)No.3241 of 2025
The Management of
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
(Madurai) Limited
Dindigul Region,
Represented by its General Manager,
Dindigul. ... Appellants/1st Respondent
-Vs-
1.C.Arokiyasamy ...1st Respondent/Petitioner
2.The Administrator
Tamil Nadu State Transport Employees
Pension Fund Trust,
Thiruvalluvar Illam,
Anna Salai,
Chennai-02. ...2nd Respondent/2nd
Respondent
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 07/03/2025 01:01:15 pm )
W.A(MD)No.416 of 2025
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause XV of Letters of Patent Appeal,
against the order dated 07.01.2019 made in W.P(MD)No.24867 of 2018
passed by this Court.
For Appellant : Mr.B.Ramanathan
Additional Government Pleader
For Respondent : Died
JUDGMENT
DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.
AND
R.POORNIMA, J.
The appeal is preferred by the Transport Corporation, being aggrieved
by the order passed by the learned Single Judge allowing the writ of
Certiorarified Mandamus filed by the employee/first respondent to quash
the order dated 08.11.2011 passed by the Corporation. The impugned order
dated 08.11.2011 is to the effect that the reduction of pay scale of 5 stages
with cumulative effect for the proven charge of grave misconduct viz.,
passing road accident for the third time. This impugned order was
challenged by way of writ petition without exercising the statutory remedy
for preferring the appeal before the Tribunal on the ground that after passing
of the impugned order on 08.11.2011, the delinquent was relieved from
service accepting his request for Voluntary Retirement(VRS). Having
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 07/03/2025 01:01:15 pm )
relieved him from service without any caveat, the reduction of pay scale of
5 stages cannot be implemented.
2.The learned Single Judge, on appreciating the facts, stated that
admittedly the punishment proposed in the impugned order cannot be
imposed in view of the subsequent event viz., voluntary retirement of the
delinquent. Therefore, quashed the impugned order and directed the
respondents to pay the consequential monetary and pensionary benefits. The
present appeal is directed challenging the order of the learned Single Judge.
3.Due to the negligence of the writ petitioner, the Department has
suffered monetary loss and it is the third accident, which the delinquent has
caused. Hence, after due enquiry, the punishment of reduction of pay scale
of five stages ordered. The acceptance of his request of voluntary retirement
and reliving him from service cannot be a sand in the way of implementing
the punishment awarded. Pointing out that the delinquent had not preferred
any appeal against the punishment awarded and the writ petition was filed
three years after passing of the impugned order. Therefore, the learned
Single Judge ought to have dismissed the writ petition on the twin grounds
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 07/03/2025 01:01:15 pm )
viz., plea of alternative remedy and laches.
4.Mr.S.Arunachalam, learned counsel for the first respondent
submitted that when there is a gross violation of the constitutional right and
the alternative remedy is not vexatious, there is no bar for the aggrieved
person to approach the High Court invoking Article 226 of the Constitution
of India. Further the impugned order as a continuos cause of action and
therefore, the plea of laches will not arise.
5.That apart, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
impugned order for reduction of pay scale of 5 stages cannot be
implemented, if the employee allowed to retirement. Pointing out that the
impugned order was passed on 08.11.2011 it was not implemented till the
first respondent retired from service on 29.02.2012.
6.Having allowed the first respondent to retire voluntarily and
recovery of monetary benefits already disbursed, cannot be legally
permissible, once the employee allowed to retire without any condition, this
Court totally in agreement with the order passed by the learned Single Judge
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 07/03/2025 01:01:15 pm )
and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the first respondent.
Hence, the writ appeal stands dismissed as devoid of merits. No costs.
Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.
[G.J., J.] & [R.P., J.]
03.03.2025
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Ns
To
The Management of
Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation
(Madurai) Limited
Dindigul Region,
Represented by its General Manager,
Dindigul.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 07/03/2025 01:01:15 pm )
DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.
AND
R.POORNIMA, J.
Ns
and
03.03.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 07/03/2025 01:01:15 pm )
