Case Note & Summary
The case involved a writ appeal against a Single Judge's order that quashed a disciplinary punishment imposed on Ganapathy Murugan, an Executive Officer in the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment (HR & CE) Department of Tamil Nadu. The officer had been penalized with stoppage of increment for three months without cumulative effect for appointing one Mariappan as Maniam on a consolidated pay of Rs.1,800/- without prior approval of the Commissioner, while holding additional charge of a temple. The appointment was made on 1.5.2013, but the trustees passed a resolution to appoint Mariappan only on 29.5.2013, and even that was without prior permission from the Commissioner as required under Rule 14 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Institutions (Officers and Servants) Service Rules, 1964. The officer challenged the punishment in W.P.(MD)No.3585 of 2018, arguing that the appointment was based on the trustees' resolution under Section 55 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, and thus he should not be held liable. The Single Judge accepted this contention and set aside the punishment, prompting the Department to file the present writ appeal. The core legal issue was whether the appointment was contrary to rules and if the punishment was justified. The Department contended that Rule 14 expressly prohibits alteration of the establishment's schedule without prior approval, and the officer's appointment of Mariappan from 1.5.2013 was illegal as there was no prior permission and the subsequent resolution could not ratify it. The officer argued victimization and mala fide in denying his promotion based on a pending disciplinary case and subsequent minor punishments. The Division Bench of the Madras High Court, after examining Section 55 and Rule 14, held that while Section 55 allows trustees to fill vacancies, such appointments are subject to service rules. Rule 14 clearly mandates that the trustee or trustees shall not alter the schedule of establishment without previous permission of the Assistant Commissioner or Joint/Deputy Commissioner. The Bench found that the officer's action in appointing Mariappan without prior approval was a clear violation of Rule 14, and there could be no post-facto ratification. The Single Judge had erred in relying on a Government Order that was not applicable. Consequently, the Division Bench allowed the writ appeal, set aside the Single Judge's order, and upheld the punishment of stoppage of increment. It also left the matter of the respondent's promotion to be considered by the authorities subject to the confirmed punishment, implying that after the currency of the punishment, his promotion should be decided on merits. No costs were ordered.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Disciplinary Proceedings - Validity of Punishment - Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, Section 55; Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Institutions (Officers and Servants) Service Rules, 1964, Rule 14 - The writ petitioner, an Executive Officer, appointed a person as Maniam on consolidated pay without prior permission of the Commissioner, in violation of Rule 14; the trustees' resolution dated 29.5.2013 could not ratify the appointment made from 1.5.2013. Held that the appointment was illegal and the punishment of stoppage of increment for three months without cumulative effect was justified (Paras 7-9). B) Service Law - Promotion - Effect of Confirmed Punishment - Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules - The Court, while upholding the punishment, left the issue of promotion to be considered by the authorities subject to the order, indicating that after the currency of punishment, the employee's promotion cannot be denied solely on the ground of this punishment (Para 10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appointment of a person as Maniam on consolidated pay without prior approval of the Commissioner of HR and CE Department is contrary to the Rules?
Final Decision
Writ Appeal allowed; order of Single Judge set aside; punishment of stoppage of increment for three months without cumulative effect upheld; direction that consideration for promotion subject to this order.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- Appointments of office holders in religious institutions under Section 55 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act
- 1959 must comply with service rules
- Rule 14 of Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Institutions (Officers and Servants) Service Rules
- 1964 requires prior permission of Assistant/Joint/Deputy Commissioner for altering schedule of establishment
- No post-facto ratification of illegal appointments.
