P. MOHANDOSS Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr.S.Harshavardhan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mrs.V.Yamuna Devi, learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents.

(2.) Through a charge memo dtd. 20/10/2020, two charges came to be framed against the petitioner herein under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. The first charge against the petitioner is that, on 20/4/2019, while he was serving as an Assistant Commissioner of Police, he was not present in the room in which the ballot boxes were kept for the 194 Madurai West Parliament Election, when the Tahsildar of the Excise Department and others entered the storage room, and further that he had failed to give suitable instructions to the Police personnel on duty in this regard and thereby violated Rule 20(1) of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants Conduct Rules. The second charge is that he had failed to stop the Tahsildar of the Excise Department and others from entering the storage room where the ballot boxes were kept and stop them from taking certain copies of the documents. This charge memo is put under challenge in the present Writ Petition.

(3.) According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, there is an inordinate delay in initiation and completion of the disciplinary proceedings under Rule 17(b) and therefore, the charge memo is liable to be quashed on the ground of delay and laches.