S AMIRTHALINGAM Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE prayer in the writ petition is to quash the order issued in G.O.(2D).No.658 Revenue (Ser.2(2)) Department dated 30.11.2006 imposing the punishment of stoppage of increment for two years with cumulative effect.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that he joined in the service of the Revenue Department as Junior Assistant in the year 1972 in Salem District. He was promoted as Assistant and thereafter, as Deputy Tahsildar. While the petitioner was serving as Zonal Deputy Tahsildar, Edapadi, he was eligible to get promotion as Tahsildar in the year 2002. THE petitioner's name was deferred, due to the issuance of the charge memo under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Disciplinary and Appeal) Rules on 21.11.2000, alleging the petitioner has not followed Section 23-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1896 as amended by Central Act 1 of 1984 and the Tamil Nadu Amendment Act 1997, while discharging his duty as Land Acquisition Officer. THE other charges are consequential to the said allegation. Again, on 30.11.2006, the petitioner's name was not included in the panel prepared for the year 2005, as there was pendency of charges under Rule 17(b). Final order imposing a punishment was passed on 30.11.2006.

(3.) THE learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, on the other hand, submitted that the charge memo was issued on 21.11.2000, and at that time the Section 23-A of the Land Acquisition Act was very much available and the Division Bench of this Court declared the said Section as unconstitutional only on 22.12.2000 and therefore, the charge is maintainable.