✦ High Court of India · 05 Sep 2024

High Court · 2024

Case Details High Court of India · 05 Sep 2024

Court

High Court of India

Decided

05 Sep 2024

Bench

Not available

Length

1,098 words

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India

Writ Petition No.26056 of 2024IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 05.09.2024CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESHWrit Petition No.26056 of 2024andW.M.P.Nos.28465, 28466 & 28467 of 2024A.Annadurai... PetitionerVs.1.The Transport Commissioner, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.2.The Joint Transport Commissioner, O/o.The Joint Transport Commissioner, Coimbatore Zone, Coimbatore.3.The Regional Transport Officer, O/o.The Regional Transport Officer, Tiruppur South, Tiruppur District. ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order in proceedings Order No.24955/VP3/2023 dated 14.09.2023 passed by first respondent and the consequential impugned order passed by first respondent in R.No.10013/RB1/2024 dated 24.06.2024 and quash the same as illegal and consequentially to direct the respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of Assistant on par with his junior by including his name in the 1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.26056 of 2024panel of fully qualified Junior Assistant/Typist/Steno-Typist fit for promotion to the post of Assistant from the date on which the petitioner's immediate junior was promoted along with all other consequential monetary and service benefits.For Petitioner: Mr.L.Calvin Jones for M/s.Ajmal AssociatesFor Respondents: Mr.K.Tamilvendan Government Advocate*****O R D E RThis writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned proceedings of the first respondent dated 14.09.2023 and the subsequent order passed by first respondent dated 24.06.2024 and for a consequential direction to respondents to promote the petitioner to the post of Assistant on par with his junior by including his name in the panel fit for promotion to the post of Assistant from the date on which the petitioner's immediate junior was promoted along with all service and monetary benefits.2. Heard Mr.L.Calvin Jones, learned counsel for petitioner and Mr.K.Tamilvendan, learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents.2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.26056 of 20243. The case of the petitioner is that he was working as a Junior Assistant at Regional Transport Office, Tiruppur (South). A charge memo came to be issued by the first respondent under Rule 17(a) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. The charge against the petitioner was that he had allowed a broker inside the office and he was sitting in front of the petitioner during working hours.4. The second charge against the petitioner is that while verifying the discharge register, it was found that 22 smart cards were given to persons running the driving school, which is in violation of the Motor Vehicle Rules.5. The petitioner, on receipt of the charge memo, gave a detailed explanation on 14.08.2023. The first respondent, through proceedings dated 14.09.2023, imposed punishment of stoppage of increment for two years without cumulative effect against the petitioner.6. It will be relevant to extract the operative portion of the order passed by the first respondent herein:@xG';F eltof;if mjpfhup-3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.26056 of 2024nghf;Ftuj;J Mizau; mtu;fspd; ,Wjp cj;jut[,t;tpdj;jpy; Fw;wk; rhl;lg;gl;l mYtyupd; tpsf;fk; kw;Wk; Mtz';fis ftdkhf guprPyid bra;jjpy;. jpU/m/mz;zhj;Jiu ,sepiy cjtpahsu;. tl;lhug; nghf;Ftuj;J mYtyfk;. jpUg;g{u;(bjw;F) mtu;fs; rku;g;gpj;Js;s tpsf;fk; Vw;Wf;bfhs;s jf;fjhf ,y;iy/vdnt. mtu; kPjhd Fw;wr;rhl;Lfs; epU:gzkhdjhf Kot[bra;ag;gl;L. jpU/m/mz;zhj;Jiu ,sepiy cjtpahsu;. tl;lhug; nghf;Ftuj;J mYtyfk;. jpUg;g{u;(bjw;F) mtu;fs; kPJ @jpus; tpistpd;wp ,uz;lhz;LfSf;fhd Cjpa cau;t[ epWj;jk;@ (Stoppage of increment for two years without cumulative effect) vd;w jz;lid tpjpj;J cj;jut[ gpwg;gpf;fg;gLfpwJ/ jpU/m/mz;zhj;Jiu ,sepiy cjtpahsu;. tl;lhug; nghf;Ftuj;J mYtyfk;. jpUg;g{u;(bjw;F) mtu;fs;. ,e;j cj;jut[f;F vjpuhf nky;KiwaPL bra;a tpUk;gpdhy; mtu; ,e;j cj;jut[ fpilf;fg; bgw;w 60 ehl;fSf;Fs; muRr; brayu;. cs; (nghf;Ftuj;J) Jiw. brd;id 9 mtu;fsplk; nky;KiwaPL bra;ayhk; vdj; bjuptpf;fg;gLfpwJ/@7. In the light of the above order, the name of the petitioner was not included in the panel for promotion to the post of Assistant since there was a currency of punishment. According to the petitioner, on the crucial date, i.e., on 15.03.2021, there was no currency of punishment against the petitioner. In spite of the same, the name of the petitioner was not added in the panel. Hence, the proceedings of the first respondent dated 24.06.2024 has also been put to challenge.4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.26056 of 20248. The charge memo was issued against the petitioner by framing two charges against him. For both charges, the petitioner has given his explanation. While dealing with the same, the first respondent is expected to give reasoning as to why the explanation given by the petitioner is rejected. It is now too well settled that an order passed without assigning any reason will also come within the scope of an order passed in violation of principles of natural justice. This is more so in a case where an order will be subjected to an appeal. Only if an authority assigns reasons, the appellate authority or the Court while appreciating the order will be able to ascertain as to whether there was proper application of mind while the order was passed.9. The order passed by the first respondent has already been extracted supra. The order is totally bereft of any reasons and the first respondent has merely stated that the explanation given by the petitioner is not acceptable and therefore, the punishment is imposed against the petitioner. Such order is an error of law apparent on the face of the order. The same is liable to be interfered with by this Court. Accordingly, the impugned proceedings of the first respondent dated 14.09.2023 is hereby quashed.5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.26056 of 202410. In the light of the above order, the subsequent order of the first respondent dated 24.06.2024 also cannot be sustained since by virtue of quashing the order, there is no subsisting punishment against the petitioner. That apart, the crucial date for the panel for promotion to the post of Assistant is 15.03.2021. Admittedly, on that date, there was no currency of punishment against the petitioner. This is yet another ground on which the impugned order dated 24.06.2024 is liable to be interfered with by this Court.11. For the aforesaid finding, the impugned proceedings of the first respondent dated 14.09.2023 and the subsequent order passed by first respondent dated 24.06.2024 are hereby quashed.12. The matter is remitted back to the file of the first respondent and the first respondent is directed to conduct an enquiry and specifically deal with the explanation given by the petitioner and thereafter, pass final orders on its own merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.26056 of 2024In the result, this writ petition is allowed with the above direction. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.05.09.2024Neutral Citation: Yes/NoIndex: yes/noSpeaking Order/Non-Speaking OrdergmTo1.The Transport Commissioner, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.2.The Joint Transport Commissioner, O/o.The Joint Transport Commissioner, Coimbatore Zone, Coimbatore.3.The Regional Transport Officer, O/o.The Regional Transport Officer, Tiruppur South, Tiruppur District.7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Writ Petition No.26056 of 2024N.ANAND VENKATESH, JgmWrit Petition No.26056 of 202405.09.20248/8

Find similar cases Start drafting free

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments

More cases under Constitution of India