D NATARAJAN Vs. SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The relief sought for herein is to quash the impugned order of the first respondent, in and under which, the punishment of removal from service was imposed on the petitioner for the charges proved against him by the Tribunal in the disciplinary proceedings and to direct the respondents to grant all attendant benefits both service and monetary etc.

(2.) Few facts, which are relevant for consideration herein are as follows:

(3.) In short, the charges framed against the petitioner are that (i)the petitioner demanded Rs.1000/- for releasing and for not filing cases against three persons by names (a)Mariappan (b)Madhu and (c)Raman, all belonging to Kadiripuram, who were detained by the petitioner at the Forest quarters for alleged illicit felling of green bamboos in the reserved forest on 15.1.1983 and in pursuance of the agreement, the petitioner agreed to receive Rs.600/- at the rate of Rs.200/- each and received Rs.500/- from one Karuppan on 15.1.1983 and released those three persons from their detention and received balance amount of Rs.100/- from Chinnakannu through Rajagopal, who accompanied Chinnasamy on 20.1.1983 at Thurinjipatti and (ii)while releasing them, the petitioner obtained the signatures of Mariappan, Madhu and Raman and also from one Krishnan as the said Raman was a school going boy, on separate blank sheets of paper on 15.1.1983 and foisted cases against Madhu, Mariappan and Krishnan and created records as if they were arrested on 16.1.1983, while they were illicitly felling green bamboos from the Reserve Forest at Kavaramalai, and recorded statement from them and as if they admitted the offence and agreed to pay the compounding fees and remitted the compounding fees of Rs.60/- at Rs.20/- each in Forest Range Office, Morappur at Harur under due receipts dated 21.1.1983 out of Rs.600/- received by the petitioner as illegal gratification. The same was followed by show cause notice, reply and departmental proceedings by the Tribunal for disciplinary proceedings. After departmental enquiry, the Tribunal filed its report holding the petitioner guilty of both the charges to the disciplinary authority, who remitted the case to the Government for passing final orders. Thereafter, the petitioner was again issued with second show cause notice about the proposed punishment of removal from service and the same was followed by his explanation. Thereafter, the first respondent Government has obtained the views of Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission and on the basis of the findings rendered by the Tribunal and the views expressed by TNPSC decided to remove the petitioner from service and accordingly passed the impugned order. Aggrieved against the same, the petitioner approached the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal by way of O.A.No.1841 of 2002 and the same was thereafter transferred to this Court and renumbered as the present writ petition.