CHIEF ENGINEER PERSONNEL TNEB MADRAS Vs. K RAMAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two writ appeals are directed against the orders in W. P. Nos. 10089 and 10090 of 1983. The respondent in W. A. No. 244 of 1984 is K. Raman, Assistant Divisional Engineer in M. R. T. The respondent in W. A. No. 245 of 1984 is A. P. Ramasamy, Divisional Engineer in M. R. T. "m. R. T. " is the abbreviation of Meter Relay Testing.

(2.) THE short facts leading to the writ appeals are as follows :- A case of theft of electrical energy to the tune of Rs. 2,41,406/- at Messrs. Crystal Ice Factory, Guindy, Madras was noticed on 26th May, 1983. A complaint was lodged by the Chief Engineer (Personnel), Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Madras with the police concerning this theft. The police initiated investigation. In the course of such investigation, meters with seals similar to those tested on 13th November, 1975, 11th November, 1975 and 12th March, 1976 were required by the police. That was with a view to cross-check with the seals concerned in the case of theft of energy. On 9th June, 1983, the Additional Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board addressed a letter to the Sub-Inspector of Police, Guindy, Madras with copies marked to Raman, the respondent in W. A. No. 244 of 1984. Inter alia, it was stated therein as to the modus operandi that could be adopted to trace the specimen seals. There was also a note to the said respondent as the sub-Inspector of Police, Guindy, in the manner set out therein. On 26th July, 1983 Raman wrote to the Vigilance Cell of the Board with a copy to Ramasamy, the respondent in W. A. No. 245 of 1984. In that letter it was stated that the concerned meters were not easily traceable. Difficulties even with regard to the tracing of test records were also pointed out in that letter. On 9th August, 1983, the Inspector General of Police and Chief Vigilance Officer of the Board wrote to the Superintending Engineer (Distribution), Madras Electricity System (South), Madras-2, complaining that the investigation was unnecessarily pending for want of co-operation from Raman. He further wanted instructions to be issued to Raman to trace the test records. This letter may now be extracted :

(3.) IT was under those circumstances the two writ petitions came to the field - W. P. No. 10089 of 1983 by Raman and W. P. No. 10090 of 1983 by A. P. Ramasamy - to quash the respective orders of transfer.