Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, R. Ponnudurai, was serving as an Assistant Engineer in the Agricultural Engineering Department, Tamil Nadu. He was arrested on 05.07.2022 by the Tirunelveli CB-CID in Crime No.2 of 2021 on allegations of helping other accused in illegal sand mining while serving as Assistant Executive Engineer. Pursuant to his arrest, he was placed under suspension on 12.07.2022 under Rule 17(e)(2) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. A charge memo was issued based on his alleged confession, and a departmental enquiry was conducted. The Enquiry Officer found him guilty of 8 charges, and by proceedings dated 11.04.2022, he was imposed with a punishment of stoppage of increment for one year with cumulative effect and was directed to compensate 50% of the loss caused under Charge No.5, amounting to Rs. 3,50,000, to be deducted from his salary at Rs. 25,000 per month for 14 months. Despite the conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings and imposition of punishment, the suspension order was not revoked. The petitioner submitted a representation on 29.02.2024 to revoke the suspension, but it was rejected by the first respondent (Chief Engineer) by order dated 06.08.2024, citing G.O.(Ms)No.81 dated 04.08.2022 issued by the State Government's Human Resources Management Department. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorarified mandamus to quash the rejection order and direct reinstatement. The court considered the submissions of the petitioner's counsel, Mr. P. Ganapathi Subramanian, and the respondents' counsel, Mr. C. Venkatesh Kumar, Special Government Pleader. The court held that once the disciplinary proceedings are concluded and punishment imposed, the suspension order cannot be continued indefinitely. The impugned order was quashed, and the respondents were directed to reinstate the petitioner in service at once.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Suspension - Revocation of Suspension - Rule 17(e)(2) of Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules - The petitioner, an Assistant Engineer, was suspended following his arrest in a criminal case. After the departmental enquiry concluded and punishment was imposed, the suspension was not revoked. The court held that once the disciplinary proceedings are concluded, the suspension order must be revoked, and the employee cannot be kept under suspension indefinitely. The impugned order rejecting the representation for revocation was quashed. (Paras 1-6) B) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Article 226 of Constitution of India - The court exercised its writ jurisdiction to quash the order rejecting the petitioner's representation for revocation of suspension, as the continued suspension after conclusion of disciplinary proceedings was arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice. (Paras 1-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the suspension of the petitioner can be continued even after the conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings and imposition of punishment.
Final Decision
The impugned order dated 06.08.2024 is quashed. The respondents are directed to reinstate the petitioner in service at once.
Law Points
- Suspension cannot be continued after conclusion of disciplinary proceedings
- Rule 17(e)(2) of Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules
- G.O.(Ms)No.81 dated 04.08.2022
- Article 226 of Constitution of India
