N GNANASEKARAN Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petitioner was working as a Police Constable Grade II with effect from 9.6.1993. A charge was framed against him on 8.8.1998 to the effect that he deserted the guard duty at Lakshmi Vilas Bank on 1.8.1998 at 03.15 hours abandoning the Fire Arms in the guard room and also left the gates open. THE Enquiry Officer held that the charge was proved. THE second respondent, by order dated 22.12.1998 dismissed him from service, as against which an appeal was filed before the first respondent, in which the punishment stood modified in G.O.3(D) No.1051, Home Department dated 20.11.2000 into one of reduction in time scale of pay by three stages for a period of six years i.e. Rs.3050/- in the scale of pay of Rs.3050-75-3950-80-4590 with effect from 20.12.1998 and increments should be postponed for six years after the expiry of the period of the reduction in time scale of pay mentioned above.

(2.) IT was against the said order of the Government, the petitioner filed a review to modify the order, which was rejected in G.O.(2D) No.202, Home Department dated 12.6.2003. Then, the petitioner filed another appeal to the Chief Secretary on 4.1.2004, which was forwarded to the first respondent, who rejected the same in G.O.(2D) No.348, Home Department dated 14.6.2006.

(3.) MR.K.Venkataramani, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that this is a case where the original order of punishment in the year 1998 was dismissal from service, which was modified in the year 2000 into one of reduction in time scale of pay for six years and postponement of increments for six years after the expiry of the punishment of reduction in time scale of pay. It is his contention that actually there are two punishments for the same act; one is the reduction in time scale of pay for six years in three stages and another, postponement of increments for six years after the punishment of reduction in time scale of pay and according to him, the total punishment is for a period of 12 years. By relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Chairman-cum-Managing Director, Coal India Ltd., and another vs. Mukul Kumar Choudhuri and others [(2009) 15 SCC 620], he would submit that the punishment is shockingly disproportionate to the charge.