Case Note & Summary
The writ appeals were filed by the Principal Secretary and Commissioner of Backward Classes, Welfare Department, and the District Collector against a common order dated 17.03.2023, which set aside the removal of two Matrons from service. The Matrons were charged with bribery, having allegedly paid bribes to a Warden in 2011, leading to their removal in 2014. The learned Single Judge found discrimination in the disciplinary actions taken against the Matrons compared to Mr. Ganapathy, who faced similar charges but received a lesser penalty of compulsory retirement. The appellants contended that the charges were serious and warranted the removal of the Matrons, while the respondents argued that the disparity in punishment was unjustified. The court acknowledged the lack of justification for different punishments and directed the District Collector to issue a fresh notice to the respondents, allowing them an opportunity to be heard and to pass a new order considering the circumstances of Mr. Ganapathy's case. The court modified the earlier order, setting aside the removal and ordering a fresh inquiry to be completed within twelve weeks. The appeals were disposed of without costs.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Disciplinary Proceedings - Disparity in Punishment - Not applicable to the Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1973, Rule 20(1) - The court noted that the respondents faced similar charges as Mr. Ganapathy but received harsher penalties without justification, leading to a modification of the learned Single Judge's order. The court directed a fresh hearing and consideration of the case in light of the punishment imposed on Mr. Ganapathy (Paras 12-14).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the punishment imposed on the respondents was justified in light of the charges and the treatment of a co-accused.
Final Decision
The court modified the order of the learned Single Judge by setting aside the removal orders and directed the District Collector to issue a fresh notice to the respondents, allowing them an opportunity to be heard and to pass a fresh order considering the circumstances of Mr. Ganapathy's case within twelve weeks.
Law Points
- Disciplinary proceedings
- service jurisprudence
- punishment disparity
- opportunity to be heard
