G PERIANNAN Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER seeks to quash the impugned order of the second respondent in Na.Ka.129266/91/N-5 dated 1.3.1993 and to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service with full backwages, continuity of service and all other attendant benefits.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Noon-Meal Organiser on 7.3.1983 and was continuously employed in the said post. By proceeding dated 5.12.1991 the petitioner was placed under suspension and a charge memo was issued to the petitioner by the third respondent on 17.2.1992 containing nine charges. Petitioner was called upon to submit his explanation and on 22.21992 petitioner denied each and every charge. Second respondent without conducting enquiry in spite of the fact that the petitioner denied the charges, passed the order of dismissal of petitioner from service on 1.3.1993. Petitioner preferred Appeal before the first respondent on 9.11.1993 and no order having been passed, petitioner challenged the order of dismissal in O.A.No.2526 of 1995, which is transferred and numbered as the above Writ Petition.

(3.) THE learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, on the basis of the averments contained in the affidavit submitted that serious charges are levelled against the petitioner and inspection reports were relied upon to frame the charges. Learned counsel also submitted that the principles of natural justice is thoroughly violated by the respondents not only while seeking explanation, but also by not conducting enquiry and relying upon the statements and reports, without giving opportunity to the petitioner to cross-examine the persons, who gave statements/reports. It is also contended that the impugned order having been passed on the basis of serious allegations, it causes serious stigma on the side of the petitioner and therefore the same is liable to be set aside.