S SAMUTHIRAM Vs. TAMIL NADU ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner, against the order, dated 23. 03. 2004 made in O. A. No. 1144 of 2000 by the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, whereby the Original Application filed by the petitioner herein was dismissed.

(2.) THE brief facts needed for disposal of the case : it has been admitted that the petitioner joined the service of Armed Reserve Police, as Police Constable, Grade II on 27. 05. 1988 and served at various places in Tirunelveli District. On the relevant date, 09. 07. 1999, he was deputed to Kuttralam for season bandobust duty. While so, the petitioner was charged for an offence of eve-teasing and placed under suspension. After Departmental Enquiry, he was removed from service by respondents 2 and 3. Aggrieved by which, he preferred the Original Application, which was dismissed by the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal.

(3.) MR. N. Vijay Shankar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that on the same set of facts, criminal case was also filed against the petitioner in Cr. No. 625 of 1999 on the file of Tenkasi Police Station, which ended in honourable acquittal, as the complainant and her husband did not support the prosecution case, saying that they could not identify the person, who committed eve-teasing. According to him, it is a honourable acquittal, hence, the departmental action resulting in his removal from service is legally not sustainable. In support of his contention, learned counsel cited the following decisions : 1. State of Tamil Nadu vs. M. Jayapal, 2005 (2) MLJ 486 2. G. M. Tank vs. State of Gujarat and another, 2006 (3) MLJ 143 (SC)