High Court · 2024
Case Details
W.P.No.2237 of 2024IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 15.10.2024CORAM :THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESHWrit Petition No.2237 of 2024and WMP No.2434 of 2024M.Muthukumar Municipality Commissioner (Grade-II)S/o.Late MylsamyNo.13, Subbaiyan NagarT.KottampattiPollachi-642 002 …. Petitioner -Vs- 1.State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by its Secretary Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department(MAWS) Secretariat, Fort St.George Chennai 600 009.2.The Director Director of Municipal Administration No.78, Urban Administrative Building Santhome High Road Chennai 600 009.3.The District Collector Tiruppur District Tiruppur.4.The Chairperson Local Compliance Committee Joint Director/Project Director Office of Magalir Thittam Collectorate, Tiruppur.5.The District Social Welfare Officer1 / 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.2237 of 2024 District Welfare Office No.35, 36 District Collectors Office Tiruppur. ..Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the 2nd respondent in ROC No.24366/2021/C2 dated 12.01.2024 and quash the same, consequently reinstate the petitioner in service.For Petitioner :Mr.L.P.MauryaFor Respondents :Mr.C.SelvarajAdditional Government Pleaderfor R1 to R3Mr.P.BalathandayuthamSpecial Government Pleaderfor R4 & R5 O R D E R This writ petition has been filed against the order of suspension passed by the 2nd respondent dated 12.01.2024 and for a consequential direction to reinstate the petitioner into service.2.The case of the petitioner is that he was working as a Municipal Commissioner [Grade-II] at Kangeyam Municipality. The petitioner suspended the Domestic Breed Checkers, who were illegally appointed. As a counter blast, they gave a sexual harassment complaint against the petitioner. Pursuant to this complaint, a 2 / 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.2237 of 2024charge memo came to be issued against the petitioner on 11.11.2021 by the 1st respondent. This charge memo was challenged by the petitioner by filing WP.No.28785 of 2022, on the ground that the authority lacked jurisdiction. The same was quashed by this Court by an order dated 21.06.2023.3.The petitioner was thereafter issued a summon to appear before the local complaint Committee. An enquiry was conducted and a fresh charge memo was issued against the petitioner dated 20.01.2024. The same has been put to challenge in WP.No.18578 of 2024 and this writ petition is pending.4.The 2nd respondent also issued suspension order dated 12.01.2024, suspending the petitioner from service. The same has been put to challenge in the present writ petition.5.The 2nd respondent has filed a counter. The 2nd respondent has taken a stand that a local complaint Committee was constituted as per Section 6 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Work Place Act, 2013 and this Committee conducted an enquiry on 29.08.2022 and the enqury report was also forwarded to the 2nd respondent. It was mentioned in the report that the DBC workers were sexually harassed. Therefore, proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955. The petitioner was also placed under suspension considering the seriousness of the 3 / 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.2237 of 2024charges. The 2nd respondent has justified the petitioner being kept under suspension considering the charge and has also taken a stand that the suspension order has been passed by the Competent Authority on valid grounds and that the same does not require the interference of this Court. Accordingly, the 2nd respondent has sought for the dismissal of this writ petition.6.When the matter came up for hearing on 01.10.2024, this Court passed the following order:The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the suspension order came to be issued based on the complaints given against the petitioner, which resulted in the registration of the first information reports. 2. The first information reports that were registered against the petitioner in Crime Nos.4, 5 and 6 of 2022 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Kangeyam All Women Police Station, Tiruppur were quashed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Crl.O.P.Nos.9735 to 9737 of 2022 by a common order dated 21.2.2024. 3. In view of the same, it is submitted that the suspension order itself cannot be sustained. 4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents shall take instructions in this regard. 5. Post on 15.10.2024 under the caption 'for orders'. 7.Heard Mr.L.P.Maurya, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.C.Selvaraj, learned Additional Government Pleader for R1 to R3 and Mr.P.Balathandayutham, learned 4 / 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.2237 of 2024Special Government Pleader for R4 & R5.8.The short issue that arises for consideration in the present writ petition is as to whether the order of suspension passed against the petitioner has to be continued after the above development that has taken place whereby on the same set of facts, criminal proceedings were initiated and all the FIRs came to be quashed by this Court by order dated 21.02.2024, by holding that the complaint given against the petitioner is false and it has been given only to wreak vengeance and it is an abuse of process of law.9.There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the 2nd respondent is competent to place the petitioner under suspension. When the suspension order was passed, an allegation was made against the petitioner, as if, he has sexually harassed the DBC workers. However, this Court on going through the materials found that the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner is an abuse of process of law and tha a false complaint has been given against the petitioner to wreak vengeance. In the light of this finding given by this Court in the quash petitions, there is no justification to continue with the order of suspension passed against the petitioner.10.In the light of the above discussion, this Court is inclined to interfere with the order of suspension passed against the petitioner by the 2nd respondent in ROC No.24366/2021/C2 dated 12.01.2024 and the same is hereby quashed. As a 5 / 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.2237 of 2024consequence, there shall be a direction to the 2nd respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service with all attendant benefits by passing necessary orders forthwith.11.It is made clear that the petitioner has filed another writ petition challenging the charge memo and the same is pending in WP.No.18578 of 2024. The grounds that has been raised in that writ petition can be independently gone into and this Court intentionally did not go into that issue in this writ petition.12.In the result, this writ petition is allowed in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.15.10.2024Index : Yes/NoNCS : Yes/NoKPTo 1.The Secretary State of Tamil Nadu6 / 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.2237 of 2024 Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department(MAWS) Secretariat, Fort St.George Chennai 600 009.2.The Director Director of Municipal Administration No.78, Urban Administrative Building Santhome High Road Chennai 600 009.3.The District Collector Tiruppur District Tiruppur.4.The Chairperson Local Compliance Committee Joint Director/Project Director Office of Magalir Thittam Collectorate Tiruppur.5.The District Social Welfare Officer District Welfare Office No.35, 36 District Collectors Office Tiruppur. N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.KP7 / 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.2237 of 2024Writ Petition No.2237 of 2024 15.10.20248 / 8
W.P.No.2237 of 2024IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 15.10.2024CORAM :THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESHWrit Petition No.2237 of 2024and WMP No.2434 of 2024M.Muthukumar Municipality Commissioner (Grade-II)S/o.Late MylsamyNo.13, Subbaiyan NagarT.KottampattiPollachi-642 002 …. Petitioner -Vs- 1.State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by its Secretary Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department(MAWS) Secretariat, Fort St.George Chennai 600 009.2.The Director Director of Municipal Administration No.78, Urban Administrative Building Santhome High Road Chennai 600 009.3.The District Collector Tiruppur District Tiruppur.4.The Chairperson Local Compliance Committee Joint Director/Project Director Office of Magalir Thittam Collectorate, Tiruppur.5.The District Social Welfare Officer1 / 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.2237 of 2024 District Welfare Office No.35, 36 District Collectors Office Tiruppur. ..Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the 2nd respondent in ROC No.24366/2021/C2 dated 12.01.2024 and quash the same, consequently reinstate the petitioner in service.For Petitioner :Mr.L.P.MauryaFor Respondents :Mr.C.SelvarajAdditional Government Pleaderfor R1 to R3Mr.P.BalathandayuthamSpecial Government Pleaderfor R4 & R5 O R D E R This writ petition has been filed against the order of suspension passed by the 2nd respondent dated 12.01.2024 and for a consequential direction to reinstate the petitioner into service.2.The case of the petitioner is that he was working as a Municipal Commissioner [Grade-II] at Kangeyam Municipality. The petitioner suspended the Domestic Breed Checkers, who were illegally appointed. As a counter blast, they gave a sexual harassment complaint against the petitioner. Pursuant to this complaint, a 2 / 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.2237 of 2024charge memo came to be issued against the petitioner on 11.11.2021 by the 1st respondent. This charge memo was challenged by the petitioner by filing WP.No.28785 of 2022, on the ground that the authority lacked jurisdiction. The same was quashed by this Court by an order dated 21.06.2023.3.The petitioner was thereafter issued a summon to appear before the local complaint Committee. An enquiry was conducted and a fresh charge memo was issued against the petitioner dated 20.01.2024. The same has been put to challenge in WP.No.18578 of 2024 and this writ petition is pending.4.The 2nd respondent also issued suspension order dated 12.01.2024, suspending the petitioner from service. The same has been put to challenge in the present writ petition.5.The 2nd respondent has filed a counter. The 2nd respondent has taken a stand that a local complaint Committee was constituted as per Section 6 of the Sexual Harassment of Women at Work Place Act, 2013 and this Committee conducted an enquiry on 29.08.2022 and the enqury report was also forwarded to the 2nd respondent. It was mentioned in the report that the DBC workers were sexually harassed. Therefore, proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955. The petitioner was also placed under suspension considering the seriousness of the 3 / 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.2237 of 2024charges. The 2nd respondent has justified the petitioner being kept under suspension considering the charge and has also taken a stand that the suspension order has been passed by the Competent Authority on valid grounds and that the same does not require the interference of this Court. Accordingly, the 2nd respondent has sought for the dismissal of this writ petition.6.When the matter came up for hearing on 01.10.2024, this Court passed the following order:The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the suspension order came to be issued based on the complaints given against the petitioner, which resulted in the registration of the first information reports. 2. The first information reports that were registered against the petitioner in Crime Nos.4, 5 and 6 of 2022 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Kangeyam All Women Police Station, Tiruppur were quashed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in Crl.O.P.Nos.9735 to 9737 of 2022 by a common order dated 21.2.2024. 3. In view of the same, it is submitted that the suspension order itself cannot be sustained. 4. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents shall take instructions in this regard. 5. Post on 15.10.2024 under the caption 'for orders'. 7.Heard Mr.L.P.Maurya, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.C.Selvaraj, learned Additional Government Pleader for R1 to R3 and Mr.P.Balathandayutham, learned 4 / 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.2237 of 2024Special Government Pleader for R4 & R5.8.The short issue that arises for consideration in the present writ petition is as to whether the order of suspension passed against the petitioner has to be continued after the above development that has taken place whereby on the same set of facts, criminal proceedings were initiated and all the FIRs came to be quashed by this Court by order dated 21.02.2024, by holding that the complaint given against the petitioner is false and it has been given only to wreak vengeance and it is an abuse of process of law.9.There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the 2nd respondent is competent to place the petitioner under suspension. When the suspension order was passed, an allegation was made against the petitioner, as if, he has sexually harassed the DBC workers. However, this Court on going through the materials found that the criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner is an abuse of process of law and tha a false complaint has been given against the petitioner to wreak vengeance. In the light of this finding given by this Court in the quash petitions, there is no justification to continue with the order of suspension passed against the petitioner.10.In the light of the above discussion, this Court is inclined to interfere with the order of suspension passed against the petitioner by the 2nd respondent in ROC No.24366/2021/C2 dated 12.01.2024 and the same is hereby quashed. As a 5 / 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.2237 of 2024consequence, there shall be a direction to the 2nd respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service with all attendant benefits by passing necessary orders forthwith.11.It is made clear that the petitioner has filed another writ petition challenging the charge memo and the same is pending in WP.No.18578 of 2024. The grounds that has been raised in that writ petition can be independently gone into and this Court intentionally did not go into that issue in this writ petition.12.In the result, this writ petition is allowed in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.15.10.2024Index : Yes/NoNCS : Yes/NoKPTo 1.The Secretary State of Tamil Nadu6 / 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.2237 of 2024 Municipal Administration and Water Supply Department(MAWS) Secretariat, Fort St.George Chennai 600 009.2.The Director Director of Municipal Administration No.78, Urban Administrative Building Santhome High Road Chennai 600 009.3.The District Collector Tiruppur District Tiruppur.4.The Chairperson Local Compliance Committee Joint Director/Project Director Office of Magalir Thittam Collectorate Tiruppur.5.The District Social Welfare Officer District Welfare Office No.35, 36 District Collectors Office Tiruppur. N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.KP7 / 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.2237 of 2024Writ Petition No.2237 of 2024 15.10.20248 / 8