STATE OF TAMIL NADU Vs. R SELVARAJ

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed by the State of Tamil Nadu and the Commissioner of Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department challenging the order passed by the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.1523 of 2003 dated 25.4.2003.

(2.) The facts giving rise to the present writ petition may be recounted in brief:- First respondent was appointed as Executive Officer, Grade II, in 1984 and in course of time he was promoted as Grade I, Executive Officer, on 31.12.1994. Subsequently, his name was considered for promotion to the post of Assistant Commissioner and a panel was prepared by the Government on 28.3.2003 including his name and thereafter an order was passed on 9.4.2003 promoting the first respondent as Assistant Commissioner. However, it was brought to the notice of the State Government that there were allegations relating to serious irregularities on the part of the first respondent between 16.6.1997 and 10.8.2001 and the Commissioner, the present second petitioner, has issued a charge-memo dated 9.4.2003 framing 13 charges against the first respondent under Rule 17(b) of Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Disciplinary and Appeal) Rules. The first respondent filed a representation dated 17.4.2003 to the present second petitioner seeking permission to be relieved enabling him to join the promotional post. At that stage, the first respondent filed O.A.No.1523 of 2003 on 23.4.2003 for issuing a direction to the present petitioners to allow him to join as Assistant Commissioner as per the order of promotion dated 9.4.2003. Such Application was taken up by the Tribunal on 25.4.2003 and at the stage of admission itself, the Tribunal has disposed of the O.A., practically allowing the same. It has been observed by the Tribunal that after the name of the applicant was included in the panel for promotion and an order was passed by the State Government, the Commissioner had no business to prevent the applicant from joining in the promotional post. The Tribunal, therefore, directed the present petitioners - ... to consider the representation of the applicant dated 17.4.2003 in the light of the observations made above and pass orders, relieving the applicant and allow him to join in the promotive post. The enquiry can be proceeded with even after the applicant is promoted and joins the promotive post and if he is found guilty, he can be firmly dealt with. After the aforesaid order was passed by the Tribunal, the Government in 6493/RE.2.2/2003-II/ dated 13.6.2003 directed the Commissioner to take action against the person responsible for not reporting the irregularities committed by the present first respondent before preparation of the panel for promotion, thus making it clear that the order of promotion should not be given effect to. Thereafter, the present writ petition has been filed by the State Government as well as the Commissioner jointly for quashing the direction issued by the Tribunal. An order of interim stay has been passed by the Bench at the stage of admission.

(3.) The petitioners have placed reliance upon the instructions issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.368, P & AR Department, dated 18.10.1993 and contended that even though an order of promotion was passed, since the first respondent had not yet joined, the petitioners were justified in not permitting the first respondent to join the promotional post as a departmental proceeding is pending.