P JAYARAMAN Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition is directed against the order of punishment imposed by the 1st respondent in his proceedings dated 05.12.2003 in PR.No.110/2001 as confirmed by the 2nd respondent and as modified by the Appellate Authority/3rd respondent in his proceedings dated 03.05.2004 and confirmed by the 4th respondent to quash the same and to direct the respondents to refix the petitioner's pay with all consequential monetary and service benefits.

(2.) THE brief facts relevant for consideration herein are - THE petitioner was during August 2001 issued with charge memo for his alleged misconduct of sending anonymous complaints containing false allegations against the superior officers and co-police personnel during April and May 2001 and the same is followed by the enquiry initiated against the petitioner resulting in the enquiry officer's findings holding the charges against the petitioner to be proved. THEreafter, the petitioner was, on the basis of the enquiry report, imposed punishment of reduction of increment by two stages for two years and postponement of future increment for two years by the disciplinary authority and the punishment was modified by reduction of increment by one stage for one year and postponement for future increment for one year by the appellate authority and the same was confirmed by the 4th respondent in the review petition.

(3.) THE petitioner has also in support of his arguments that when the department was of the view that more than one employee were involved in the same incident, the department should proceed against all or should not proceed against none relied upon the judgment of our High Court reported in (2006) 3 MLJ 191 in N.Nandagopalan Vs. Secretary to Government Personnel and Administration Reforms(Q) Department, Chennai.