R KUMARAVEL Vs. TAMIL NADU MARITIME BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) COMMON Order The prayer in the writ petitions is to quash the order of the first respondent dated 23.1.2007 affirming the order of the second respondent dated 16..6.2006.

(2.) THE petitioners have challenged the said orders stating that they were issued with charge memo while working as Assistant Executive Engineers on 23.9.2003 framing under Rule 17b of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules apart from recoveries of the loss to the value of Rs.5.5 lakhs for the alleged defective construction and dereliction of duty. THE petitioners submitted their explanation and having not satisfied with the same, enquiry was conducted and the Enquiry Office found that out of 6 charges, 3 charges were proved. Enquiry Report was submitted on 8.2.2005 for which, petitioners submitted their remarks on 18.5.2005. According to the petitioners, without considering the same, the second respondent passed the order dated 16.6.2006 and imposed the punishment of stoppage of increment for one year without cumulative effect. THE said order was passed by the Chief Executive Officer namely P.R.Shampat. Aggrieved by the order of punishment, the petitioners have filed appeals before the first respondent board on 18.5.2005. THE said appeals were rejected by order dated 23.1.2007 wherein, the said P.R.Shampath, Chief Executive Officer also participated as a member of the Board. THErefore, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the original authority having participated while considering the appeals, the order passed by the Board dated 23.1.2007 is unsustainable, as it is vitiated by bias.

(3.) THE learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, in support of his submission, relied on a judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2002(2) SCC 290 (Amar Nath Chowdhury v. Braithwaite and Co. Ltd. and others), wherein, in paragraph Nos. 6 to 8 held thus :