V M KARMEGAM Vs. CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner had approached the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, by filing Original Application No.3653 of 2000, with a prayer call for the records of the 1st respondent in Proc.Rc.No.AB3/12554/90, dated 05.02.2000 and that of the 2nd respondent in Pro.No.B2/10351/97(4), dated 28.10.97 and quash the same with all consequential benefits.

(2.) THE petitioner, V.M.Karmegam, while serving as a Forest Watcher in Mannavanur Range, from 03.05.96 to 14.06.97, suffered a disciplinary proceedings, for which a charge memo issued containing two charges of neglect of duty in having failed to prevent illicit cutting in Reserve Forest area in kavunji Beat of Mannavanur Range and causing loss to the Government to the tune of Rs.33771/- by not preventing illicit removal. Immediately after the receipt of the charge memo issued under Rule 17(a) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules by the District Forest Officer, Kodaikanal Division, the petitioner has submitted his detailed explanations denying all the charges. THE stand taken by the petitioner in the said explanations was that the alleged irregularities had taken place prior to his joining duty at Kavunji Bean on 03.05.96 and therefore, the allegation of felling of trees were assessed by the Special Party with a report saying that the above said felling have taken place during the period of 3 to 4 months as on 13.08.96, cannot be made against the petitioner. In his further explanations, it was contended that the felling of 760 nos. of wattle trees would not have occurred within 10 days, which is prior to his joining the post. Further, the disciplinary authority, having not satisfied with the explanations offered by the petitioner, imposed the punishment of stoppage of increment for three years without cumulative effect. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent/Chief Conservator of Forests(Planning and Development), Chennai, who has, after considering the case of the petitioner, by interfering with the above said punishment, modified the said punishment of stoppage of increment for three years into one of stoppage of increment for one year without cumulative effect. As against that, the present OA came to be filed and on abolition of the Tribunal, the same was transferred on the file of this Court and renumbered as W.P.No.48107 of 2006.

(3.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.