M SIVA Vs. COMMISSIONER PALLAVARAM MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MRS. D. Geetha, learned Additional Government Pleader takes notice for the first respondent-Municipality.

(2.) THE petitioners are aggrieved by the common order of the Tribunal dated 22. 10. 2002 passed in O. A. Nos. 1946 of 2002 etc. By the said common order, while dealing with the case of 15 employees of the first respondent-Municipality and while examining the correctness of the order of the first respondent-Municipality, dated 26. 3. 2002, in and by which, the first respondent-Municipality sought to recover the property tax arrears from the petitioners and other employees, which became time barred during the relevant period when they were employed in the first respondent-Municipality as Revenue Assistants and similar other posts and who were stated to be in-charge of the collection of property tax from the house owners, the Tribunal took the view that the petitioners were liable to be punished for their inaction in the discharge of the duties as regards collection of property tax from the house owners, but felt that instead of ordering recovery of huge amount from the salary of the petitioners, the petitioners can be imposed with a punishment of stoppage of increment with cumulative effect and thereby, the first respondent would be able to save considerable amount. In effect, the Tribunal imposed the punishment on the petitioners by modifying the order dated 26. 3. 2002 of the first respondent-Municipality by holding that the petitioners will be inflicted with a punishment of stoppage of increment with cumulative effect for a period of five years.

(3.) ONE of the applicants in the above said cases before the Tribunal, by name Muthurameswaran preferred W. P. No. 26394 of 2004 and the said Writ Petition came to be disposed of by a Division Bench of this Court, by order dated 16. 9. 2004. The Division Bench followed the judgment of this Court dated 11. 8. 2004 passed in W. P. No. 22454 of 2004, wherein another judgment reported in 1988 Writ L. R. 38 (V. Nagarajan vs. Commissioner, Salem Municipality) was followed.