M. PUGALENDRAN Vs. COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Writ Petition is directed against the charge memo dated 19.08.2013, whereby and whereunder, the respondent initiated disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner on account of his submission of an incorrect report with regard to the date of last Kumbhabishegam and condition of the temple.

(2.) WHILE the petitioner was functioning as Joint Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, the Manager of Arulmighu Sama Vediswarar Temple received a telephonic call from the office of the respondent, calling for information as to when Kumbhabishegam of the said temple was performed. The petitioner was out of station. The Manager prepared the reply and it was sent to the respondent in the name of the petitioner through E -mail on 08.07.2013. While typing the message, the date of Kumbhabishegam was mentioned as '06.07.2013' instead of '06.07.2003'. It was obviously a mistake. The respondent, thereafter, issued the impugned charge memo dated 19.08.2013. The petitioner submitted his reply on 05.09.2013. The petitioner challenges the charge memo on the primary ground that the respondent erred in initiating disciplinary proceedings on a flimsy ground.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was out of station and the report was given only by the Manager, though it is true that the report was made in his name. According to the learned counsel, the date was incorrectly given and the same is evident from the fact that in the reply given on 08.07.2013, the last date of Kumbhabishegam was mentioned as '06.07.2013' instead of '06.07.2003'. The incorrect description of date was not such a serious matter to take disciplinary action against the officer.