R DEVI Vs. S LAKSHMI SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is an Assistant working in the office of the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Department. She has come forward to file the present Writ Petition seeking to challenge the order passed by the Superintendent of Police, Central Range, Vigilance and Anti Corruption (for short 'DVAC'), Chennai dated 23.3.2010 in placing her under suspension in terms of Rule 17(e)(i) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. Though the Superintendent of Police who passed the order has been made as a party in her individual name but the office which held by her is not shown as a party to the Writ Petition.

(2.) IN the order of suspension, which is impugned in this Writ Petition, it was stated that when the petitioner was working as an Assistant in the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti Corruption, she contacted Commercial Tax Check-post officials at Pethikuppam in order to influence them to release a Lorry bearing Regn.No.MP-07 G4828 loaded with ceramic goods belonging to her relative. IN view of the grave allegation, the Department conducted a discreet enquiry. Therefore, in public interest, she was placed under suspension. The order of suspension referred to the Special Report dated 1.2.2010 sent by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, V&AC, Chennai 35 and also another report from the same officer dated 15.2.2010.

(3.) THIS Court is of the opinion that such a Writ Petition is not maintainable, if filed, only against the officers made as parties in their individual names. In cases involving the Government if any relief is claimed, it is only the State, which alone can represent its interests and if ordered can grant relief to aggrieved government servants. The question of individual officers being sued in the place of the Government may not be permitted. It is only the individuals, who are before this Court. Since, no relief can be given against any individual, such a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is not maintainable.