T MUTHUKRISHNAN Vs. SPECIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is an Assistant Medical Officer at Govt. Siddha Hospital, Govt. Head Quarters Hospital, Erode. There were complaints received against the petitioner which necessitated his transfer from out of the said Hospital to the Government Primary Health Centre at Thonari, The Nilgiris. The petitioner was given relieving order on 04. 04. 2006 based upon the Transfer Order dated 29. 03. 2006. The petitioner filed a writ petition in W. P. No. 11328 of 2006. After notice to the respondents, the said writ petition was allowed by this Court by order dated 24. 04. 2006. The operative portion of the order is found in paragraph-3, which is as follows:-

(2.) HEARD the arguments of Mr. M. Muthugeethayan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Pa. Kadirvel, learned Govt. Advocate appearing for the respondent and perused the records. The original transfer was based upon complaints received against the petitioner for his misbehaviour and misconduct and therefore this Court was forced to quash the charge memo. Since no transfer can be made as a measure of punishment or to avoid disciplinary action, this Court also gave a liberty to the respondent to take action on the basis of complaints received against the petitioner. Far from taking any action on the basis of those complaints which were disclosed in the memorandum dated 29. 03. 2006, the respondent has framed charges against the petitioner contending that the petitioner has disobeyed the orders of his superior and that the petitioner has refused to receive the transfer order. This action of the respondent is contumacious as it amounts to non-compliance of the order passed by this Court in W. P. No. 11328 of 2006 dated 24. 04. 2006. When the transfer order is held to be illegal, there is no question of the respondent framing charges in respect of the very same transfer order not being either obeyed or not being received by the petitioner. In fact, the petitioner has successfully challenged the said transfer order before this Court and this Court refrained from taking any serious action on the respondent even though their action is highly reprehensible.

(3.) UNDER the circumstances, the issuance of notice under Rule 17 (a) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules and the punishment found in the impugned order is set aside and the writ petition stands allowed. Consequently, M. P. No. 1 of 2007 is closed. No costs. However, if still the respondent feels that there are serious complaints against the petitioner, taking advantage of the liberty given by this Court on the earlier occasion, it is open to the respondent to proceed in respect of those complaints.