STATE OF TAMIL NADU Vs. T.K. JAGADEESAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State is in appeal as against order dtd. 19/12/2019 of the learned single Judge. The writ Petitioner was employed as a Sub-Registrar on 21/4/2010. While so, he had been presented with lease deed dtd. 19/4/2010 for registration. Based on his understanding of the lease deed, the writ Petitioner had presented the same for registration computing the stamp duty for a period of 3 years. In the course of quarterly audit, the audit team was of the view that the lease deed was for a period of 9 years and hence there had been loss of revenue amounting to a sum of Rs.15,60,300.00. A special report was submitted by the District Registrar (Audit) to the Inspector General of Registration on 25/4/2011, in terms of which, proceedings had been initiated for deficiency in stamp duty.

(2.) Parallelly, charge memo had been issued under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules to the writ Petitioner. The charge memo alleges failure and negligence on the part of the Writ Petitioner to collect necessary stamp duty leading to loss of revenue and his negligence was construed as violation of Rule 20 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants' Conduct Rules, 1973 (Rules).

(3.) The writ Petitioner had attained the age of superannuation as on 30/4/2014. However, on the basis of the pending proceedings, he had not been permitted to retire. The initial period of lease was for 3 years, renewable at the instance of the lessee for 2 terms of 3 years each. Hence, according to the writ Petitioner, the period of renewal, which required concurrence from the lessee, ought not to be taken into account to determine the period of lease and hence collection of stamp duty for the initial period of 3 years was appropriate. The explanation tendered by the petitioner found acceptance with the enquiry officer.