V R PALANISAMY Vs. DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER seeks writ of certiorarified mandamus, to quash the order of the first respondent in R.C. No. 30803/F1/2000, dated 19.6.2002 and to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner as Chief Superintendent of the third respondent College with all monetary benefits inducing back wages from 4.4.2000 todate.

(2.) BRIEF facts which led to the filing of writ petition are as follows:

(3.) MR. K. Vijayan, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner has contended that by well considered reasonings, the second respondent has disapproved the proposal sent by the third respo0ndent/College. It was further contended that without considering the matter in proper perspective, by a cryptic order, the first respondent has allowed the Appeal granting approval for the proposed punishment of dismissal from service. Drawing Court-s attention to the judgment of the Criminal Court in C.C. No. 406 of 2001 on the file of Judicial Magistrate I, Coimbatore, which ended in acquittal and placing reliance upon M. Paul Anthony v. Bharat Gold Mines Limited AIR 1999 SC 1416 : (1999) 3 SCC 679 : 1999-I-LLJ-1094, the learned senior counsel contended that in view of acquittal of the Criminal Case, the punishment imposed upon the petitioner has to be reversed. Drawing Court-s attention to the letter of the first respondent to the third respondent/College (dated 17.5.2004), the learned senior counsel further contended that when the first respondent himself called upon the third respondent to reconsider the matter, there is no question of termination of petitioner-s service.