High Court · 2025
Case Details
WMP Nos.37828, 37840, 37936 of 2025 in Rev.Aplw SR Nos.140399, 140757, 140419 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 10-09-2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESHWMP Nos.37828, 37840, 37936 of 2025INRev.Aplw SR Nos.140399, 140757, 140419 of 20251. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary to GovernmentRevenue and Disaster Management Department, Fort St George, Chennai 600 009.2.The Additional Chief Secretary / Commissioner of Revenue AdministrationCommissionerate of Revenue Administration and Disaster Management, Ezhilagam, Chennai 600 005. Petitioners in all WMPsVsK.Baskar Respondent in all WMPsWMP No. 37828 of 2025PRAYERTo condone the delay of 278 days in filing the above Review Application against the order dated 24.10.2024 made in W.P.No. 22490/2024. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP Nos.37828, 37840, 37936 of 2025 in Rev.Aplw SR Nos.140399, 140757, 140419 of 2025WMP No. 37840 of 2025PRAYERpleased to condone the delay of 278 days in filing the above Review Application against the order dated 24.10.2024 made in WP No. 22499 / 2024.WMP No. 37936 of 2025PRAYERTo condone the delay of 278 days in filing the above Review Application against the order dated 24.10.2024 made in W.P. No.22494/2024.For Petitioners:Mr.M.Suresh KumarAdditional Advocate Generalassisted by Mr.K.H.RavikumarGovernment AdvocateFor Respondent:Mr.M.MarudhachalamCOMMON ORDERThese writ miscellaneous petitions have been filed seeking to condone the delay of 278 days in filing the above review applications. Considering the enormous delay, this Court wanted to satisfy itself as to whether any prima facie case is available for the petitioners by pointing to the error apparent on the face of the order passed in the writ petitions. Therefore, this Court thought it fit to hear the learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/writ petitioner. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP Nos.37828, 37840, 37936 of 2025 in Rev.Aplw SR Nos.140399, 140757, 140419 of 20252. In the order that was passed in the writ petitions, this Court had quashed the charge memo and also the subsequent proceedings and directed the State to permit the respondent/writ petitioner to retire from service effective from 30.06.2024. This Court also directed the State to settle and extend all the service and monetary benefits to the writ petitioner.3. The respondent filed the Contempt Petition Nos.2635 to 2637 of 2025 before this Court, on the ground that the order passed by this Court has not been complied with. When the contempt petitions came up for hearing on 04.09.2025, this Court ordered notice and posted the contempt petitions under the caption 'for reporting compliance' on 22.09.2025 and made it clear that if the order is not complied with, the contemnors will be present before the Court. During the hearing, the learned Additional Advocate General submitted that some clarity is required in the order passed in the writ petitions and hence, sought for the leave of this Court to file the review applications with delay. Accordingly, the review applications are filed along with the petitions to condone the delay and the same have been posted for hearing today. 4. The main ground that was raised by the learned Additional Advocate General is that neither the counsel for writ petitioner nor the counsel who appeared on behalf of the State brought to the notice of this Court the charge memo dated 14.02.2018 that was pending and where the enquiry was already https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP Nos.37828, 37840, 37936 of 2025 in Rev.Aplw SR Nos.140399, 140757, 140419 of 2025conducted, but the final decision was not taken. The learned Additional Advocate General submitted that in view of the order passed in the writ petitions, wherein the writ petitioner was permitted to retire from service, no further orders can be passed in the charge memo dated 14.02.2018. Therefore, the present review applications have been filed before this Court along with the petitions to condone the delay.5. In the considered view of this Court, the writ petitioner did not conceal the fact that several charge memos were issued against him. The writ petitioner was under the impression that since the order of suspension passed against him was quashed by this Court in W.P.No.32583 of 2017, by order dated 19.12.2019, which was also confirmed by the Division Bench in W.A.No.2291 of 2022 dated 13.10.2022, nothing survived in the earlier charge memo dated 14.02.2018. Such impression was gathered by the writ petitioner, since the writ petitioner was suspended pending the criminal proceedings and the charge memo was also issued to him based on the very same criminal proceedings. 6. When the final order was passed in the writ petitions on 24.10.2024, the review applicants did not bring to the notice of this Court the pending charge memo dated 14.02.2018. It is not as if it was not within their knowledge and for the reasons best known to them, it was not brought to the notice of this Court. Therefore, there is no question of continuing with the charge memo https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP Nos.37828, 37840, 37936 of 2025 in Rev.Aplw SR Nos.140399, 140757, 140419 of 2025which was pending on 14.02.2018, since this Court has already quashed the proceedings impugned in the writ petitions and directed the State to permit the writ petitioner to retire from service. Under such circumstances, there is no scope for continuing with the charge memo dated 14.02.2018. 7. In the light of the above discussions, this Court finds that there is no error apparent on the face of the order passed in the writ petitions. This Court also takes into consideration the fact that the review applications have been filed with an enormous delay and that too, after the contempt proceedings were initiated by the writ petitioner. Therefore, all these writ miscellaneous petitions stand dismissed. This Court reiterates the fact that the petitioners herein have been directed to comply with the order passed in the writ petitions and the matter has been posted to 22.09.2025 and the same shall be kept in mind by the petitioners. 10-09-2025ss https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP Nos.37828, 37840, 37936 of 2025 in Rev.Aplw SR Nos.140399, 140757, 140419 of 2025To https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP Nos.37828, 37840, 37936 of 2025 in Rev.Aplw SR Nos.140399, 140757, 140419 of 20251. The Secretary to Government Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Fort St George, Chennai 600 009.2.The Additional Chief Secretary / Commissioner of Revenue Administration Commissionerate of Revenue Administration and Disaster Management, Ezhilagam, Chennai 600 005.N.ANAND VENKATESH J. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP Nos.37828, 37840, 37936 of 2025 in Rev.Aplw SR Nos.140399, 140757, 140419 of 2025ssWMP Nos. 37828, 37840, 37936 of 2025 in Rev.Aplw SR.Nos.140399, 140757, 140419 of 202510-09-2025
WMP Nos.37828, 37840, 37936 of 2025 in Rev.Aplw SR Nos.140399, 140757, 140419 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 10-09-2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESHWMP Nos.37828, 37840, 37936 of 2025INRev.Aplw SR Nos.140399, 140757, 140419 of 20251. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary to GovernmentRevenue and Disaster Management Department, Fort St George, Chennai 600 009.2.The Additional Chief Secretary / Commissioner of Revenue AdministrationCommissionerate of Revenue Administration and Disaster Management, Ezhilagam, Chennai 600 005. Petitioners in all WMPsVsK.Baskar Respondent in all WMPsWMP No. 37828 of 2025PRAYERTo condone the delay of 278 days in filing the above Review Application against the order dated 24.10.2024 made in W.P.No. 22490/2024. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP Nos.37828, 37840, 37936 of 2025 in Rev.Aplw SR Nos.140399, 140757, 140419 of 2025WMP No. 37840 of 2025PRAYERpleased to condone the delay of 278 days in filing the above Review Application against the order dated 24.10.2024 made in WP No. 22499 / 2024.WMP No. 37936 of 2025PRAYERTo condone the delay of 278 days in filing the above Review Application against the order dated 24.10.2024 made in W.P. No.22494/2024.For Petitioners:Mr.M.Suresh KumarAdditional Advocate Generalassisted by Mr.K.H.RavikumarGovernment AdvocateFor Respondent:Mr.M.MarudhachalamCOMMON ORDERThese writ miscellaneous petitions have been filed seeking to condone the delay of 278 days in filing the above review applications. Considering the enormous delay, this Court wanted to satisfy itself as to whether any prima facie case is available for the petitioners by pointing to the error apparent on the face of the order passed in the writ petitions. Therefore, this Court thought it fit to hear the learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the petitioners as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/writ petitioner. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP Nos.37828, 37840, 37936 of 2025 in Rev.Aplw SR Nos.140399, 140757, 140419 of 20252. In the order that was passed in the writ petitions, this Court had quashed the charge memo and also the subsequent proceedings and directed the State to permit the respondent/writ petitioner to retire from service effective from 30.06.2024. This Court also directed the State to settle and extend all the service and monetary benefits to the writ petitioner.3. The respondent filed the Contempt Petition Nos.2635 to 2637 of 2025 before this Court, on the ground that the order passed by this Court has not been complied with. When the contempt petitions came up for hearing on 04.09.2025, this Court ordered notice and posted the contempt petitions under the caption 'for reporting compliance' on 22.09.2025 and made it clear that if the order is not complied with, the contemnors will be present before the Court. During the hearing, the learned Additional Advocate General submitted that some clarity is required in the order passed in the writ petitions and hence, sought for the leave of this Court to file the review applications with delay. Accordingly, the review applications are filed along with the petitions to condone the delay and the same have been posted for hearing today. 4. The main ground that was raised by the learned Additional Advocate General is that neither the counsel for writ petitioner nor the counsel who appeared on behalf of the State brought to the notice of this Court the charge memo dated 14.02.2018 that was pending and where the enquiry was already https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP Nos.37828, 37840, 37936 of 2025 in Rev.Aplw SR Nos.140399, 140757, 140419 of 2025conducted, but the final decision was not taken. The learned Additional Advocate General submitted that in view of the order passed in the writ petitions, wherein the writ petitioner was permitted to retire from service, no further orders can be passed in the charge memo dated 14.02.2018. Therefore, the present review applications have been filed before this Court along with the petitions to condone the delay.5. In the considered view of this Court, the writ petitioner did not conceal the fact that several charge memos were issued against him. The writ petitioner was under the impression that since the order of suspension passed against him was quashed by this Court in W.P.No.32583 of 2017, by order dated 19.12.2019, which was also confirmed by the Division Bench in W.A.No.2291 of 2022 dated 13.10.2022, nothing survived in the earlier charge memo dated 14.02.2018. Such impression was gathered by the writ petitioner, since the writ petitioner was suspended pending the criminal proceedings and the charge memo was also issued to him based on the very same criminal proceedings. 6. When the final order was passed in the writ petitions on 24.10.2024, the review applicants did not bring to the notice of this Court the pending charge memo dated 14.02.2018. It is not as if it was not within their knowledge and for the reasons best known to them, it was not brought to the notice of this Court. Therefore, there is no question of continuing with the charge memo https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP Nos.37828, 37840, 37936 of 2025 in Rev.Aplw SR Nos.140399, 140757, 140419 of 2025which was pending on 14.02.2018, since this Court has already quashed the proceedings impugned in the writ petitions and directed the State to permit the writ petitioner to retire from service. Under such circumstances, there is no scope for continuing with the charge memo dated 14.02.2018. 7. In the light of the above discussions, this Court finds that there is no error apparent on the face of the order passed in the writ petitions. This Court also takes into consideration the fact that the review applications have been filed with an enormous delay and that too, after the contempt proceedings were initiated by the writ petitioner. Therefore, all these writ miscellaneous petitions stand dismissed. This Court reiterates the fact that the petitioners herein have been directed to comply with the order passed in the writ petitions and the matter has been posted to 22.09.2025 and the same shall be kept in mind by the petitioners. 10-09-2025ss https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP Nos.37828, 37840, 37936 of 2025 in Rev.Aplw SR Nos.140399, 140757, 140419 of 2025To https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP Nos.37828, 37840, 37936 of 2025 in Rev.Aplw SR Nos.140399, 140757, 140419 of 20251. The Secretary to Government Revenue and Disaster Management Department, Fort St George, Chennai 600 009.2.The Additional Chief Secretary / Commissioner of Revenue Administration Commissionerate of Revenue Administration and Disaster Management, Ezhilagam, Chennai 600 005.N.ANAND VENKATESH J. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WMP Nos.37828, 37840, 37936 of 2025 in Rev.Aplw SR Nos.140399, 140757, 140419 of 2025ssWMP Nos. 37828, 37840, 37936 of 2025 in Rev.Aplw SR.Nos.140399, 140757, 140419 of 202510-09-2025