M DAKSHINAMOORTHY Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the first writ petition being W. P. No. 1694 of 2005, the petitioner seeks for quashing the order dated 30. 12. 2004 wherein and by which he was transferred from Cuddalore Division to Villupuram Division along with his post and he was also relieved from service. The writ petition was admitted on 24. 01. 2005. But, however, no ex parte interim order was granted. Subsequently, on 23. 8. 2005, an interim stay was granted in W. P. M. P. No. 1881 of 2005. But the application in W. P. M. P. No. 1882 of 2005 was dismissed as not pressed. But, however, the petitioner had neither joined duty at the post in Villupuram nor he was allowed to join duty at Cuddalore where he was working earlier.

(2.) THEREAFTER, the petitioner filed another writ petition being W. P. No. 37092 of 2006 seeking for a direction to the second respondent Joint Director of Agriculture to post him at Cuddalore in the office of the third respondent. That writ petition was merely directed to be posted along with the earlier writ petition, viz. , W. P. No. 1694 of 2005 and no interim orders were granted in M. P. No. 1 of 2006.

(3.) IN the third writ petition, viz. , W. P. No. 31830 of 2007, a charge memo dated 04. 10. 2007 was issued to the petitioner under Rule 17 (b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules [for short, 'rules']. When the matter came up on 12. 10. 2007, the learned Special Government Pleader was directed to take notice and the matter was posted subsequently. Since the learned counsel for the petitioner made a mention that the petitioner is retiring on 31. 10. 2007 and, therefore, all the matters should be taken up together, all the three writ petitions were listed on 26. 10. 2007.