S K JANAKIRAMAN Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has come forward with the above writ petition seeking for the relief of quashing the order of the 1st respondent dated 13.05.2008 and to direct the respondents to pay the entire retirement benefits and pension to the petitioner with all attendant benefits.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Junior Assistant in the Treasury Department on 11.02.1972. THEreafter, on request, he was transferred to Transport Department and posted as Junior Assistant on 16.08.1986 in the office of the Regional Transport Office, Erode. Subsequently, he worked in several places in different designations. THEreafter, the petitioner worked as Superintendent in Regional Transport Office, Dharmapuri with effect from 14.12.2004 to 20.03.2005.

(3.) PER contra, Mr.P.S.Sivashanmugasundaram, learned Additional Government Pleader would contend that there is no illegality in issuing the impugned charge memo dated 13.05.2008 against the petitioner. It is contended that though the petitioner was not present in the office on 07.01.2005 as he was on other duty, he has allowed the touts to collect the compounding fees from the vehicle owners and drivers habitually for a long time and as such, merely because the petitioner was not present at the time of inspection on 07.01.2005 in the Regional Transport Office, Dharmapuri, the charge memo is not liable to be quashed. It is further contended that the petitioner cannot claim that there is no evidence available on record at this premature stage of issuing the charge memo. It is also submitted by the learned Additional Government Pleader that at the time of issuing the charge memo, a list of documents and witnesses were annexed to the charge memo and the petitioner has to wait for the enquiry by participating in the said enquiry to establish his innocence in respect of the charge levelled against him.