P. SUBRAMANI Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the proceedings of the second respondent dated 25.10.2018 and for a consequential direction to direct the second respondent to pass necessary orders in the earlier Charge Memo issued on 09.05.2014 and in which the inquiry was also completed.

(2.) It is seen from the records that the petitioner had joined the services of the first respondent in the year 1985. He was working in his post of District Education Officer at Vellore from the year 2013. He was served with a Charge Memo by the second respondent dated 09.05.2014, under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules 1973. A glance at the Charge Memo shows that a single charge was framed against the petitioner.

(3.) The petitioner gave his explanation to the second respondent denying the charges. The third respondent was appointed as an Inquiry Officer to conduct the inquiry and the petitioner participated in the inquiry and gave his explanation. The inquiry was completed and the Inquiry Report was also filed before the second respondent. The second respondent by letter dated 12.12.2015, furnished the inquiry report to the petitioner and directed him to submit his explanation. The petitioner gave his explanation on 05.06.2014 and 25.03.2015. The petitioner also received a letter dated 14.05.2015 from the first respondent seeking for further explanation and the petitioner submitted his explanation to the first respondent on 08.06.2015.