S. SARAVANA KUMAR Vs. SENIOR REGIONAL MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN all these Writ Petitions, the petitioners are aggrieved against the orders passed by the first respondent, dated 12.06.2014 whereby these petitioners are temporarily relieved from service for the purpose of conducting an enquiry based on certain allegations.

(2.) MR .G.R.Swaminathan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that no specific charge is made against the petitioners in the impugned orders and they cannot be relieved from service temporarily without following the procedure contemplated under law.

(3.) ON perusal of the impugned orders, challenged in these Writ Petitions, it is seen that though it is stated therein that the petitioners are temporarily relieved from service, in fact it has to be construed and treated only as an order of suspension. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners the impugned orders are not properly worded. However the fact remains that the petitioners are kept out of employment temporarily, for the purpose of conducting an enquiry based on certain allegations. Hence, the respondents are directed to treat the impugned orders as one of suspension passed against the petitioners.