M ADAIKKAN Vs. REGISTRAR OF COOPERATIVE SOCIETIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the dismissal order dated 06. 12. 2005 made in Writ Petition No. 19840 of 2003, M. Adaikkan, the petitioner in the above writ petition has filed the present review petition.

(2.) THE review applicant, while functioning as Senior Inspector of Cooperative Societies, during 1995, was directed to hold additional charge of about 15 Societies as Special Officer. During the said period as Special Officer, a settlement lived at by him under Section 12 (3) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short "i. D. Act"), and for alleged violations of the Rules, a charge memo dated 31/3/1998 under Rule 17 (b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules (in short "the Rules") was issued, asking him to submit his explanation for the same. An Enquiry Officer was also appointed and at the time of enquiry, on 13/7/2002, he submitted his written explanation and the Enquiry Officer submitted his report. Based on the same, the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Salem Region has concluded that out of 55 allegations, 45 were proved and 9 were not proved, by order dated 31/1/2002, dismissed the petitioner from service. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has filed O. A. No. 807 of 2002 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal. By order dated 21/2/2003, the Tribunal, dismissed his original application and confirmed the punishment of dismissal order of the Joint Registrar of Co. operative Societies, Salem Region. The said order was challenged before this Court in W. P. No. 19840 of 2003.

(3.) IN the said writ petition it was contended that the respondents have no jurisdiction to initiate proceedings under Rule 17 (b) of the Rules; the petitioner was not given reasonable opportunity to put forth his case before the Original authority as the Tribunal, since the higher authority, viz. , the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies had imposed the capital punishment, the petitioner lost an opportunity of canvassing the order before the appellate authority; in respect of similarly placed persons, the same Department has imposed minor punishment, and in some cases, charges have been dropped. Considering all the above contentions, the reasoning of the Tribunal, volumness charges leveled against the petitioner, the enquiry proceedings, order of the Joint Registrar of Co. operative Societies, dismissing the petitioner from service and finding that the petitioner acted in a high handed manner as well as caused loss to the tune of Rs. 7. 5 lakhs to various authorities while he was the Special Officer, the punishment of dismissal imposed on him is just, reasonable and adequate to the proved charges, the learned Judge dismissed the said writ petition.