G NITHYANANDHAN Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the above writ petitions, the petitioners challenge the impugned proceedings of the second respondent dated 18.07.2008 reverting them from the post of Assistant Director of Horticulture to the Horticulture Officer.

(2.) THE case of the petitioners in nutshell is set out here under:-(a) THE petitioners joined in the service of the respondent department on 02.02.1981 and 04.02.1981 respectively as Horticulture Officers. By the proceedings of the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings, Coimbatore, vide TDP Case No.9 of 2007, proceedings were initiated against the petitioners and 27 other officers of the department in which they have been made as accused Nos.29 and 16 respectively. THE allegations against the petitioners are that they have abetted the main accused person to commit the malpractice. Even the charges themselves do not say that they did the same knowingly. THE charges are baseless.(b) While so, pending charges on the disciplinary proceedings, the petitioners were promoted as Assistant Director of Horticulture by proceedings dated 31.12.2007 considering their services. While so, to their shock and surprise, the second respondent passed an order dated 18.07.2008 quoting G.O.Ms.No.233 Agriculture Department dated 17.07.2008 stating that 24 officers already promoted are reverted and out of them 18 were promoted by mistake without taking into account the senior officers available and 6 of them are now reverted as disciplinary proceedings are pending against them. THE said Government Order has not so far been published and is kept secretly by the respondents and it is not made available to anybody. Hence, the petitioners are constrained to challenge the proceedings of the second respondent dated 18.07.2008 intimating them about the reversion alone.(c) THE grounds of challenge are:- (i) the order of reversion is in violation of principles of natural justice(ii) It has been passed in an arbitrary and mechanical manner and without application of mind(iii) Pendency of the disciplinary proceedings is not a ground for reverting the petitioners, especially when they were promoted during the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings(iv) THEre is no legal bar or prohibition for promoting a Government Servant during the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings. Thus, there is no legal necessity to revert the petitioners.(d) THE impugned proceedings are violative of Article 14 of Indian Constitution as it is discriminatory.

(3.) MR. N.R. Chandran, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners made the following submissions:-(a) Though disciplinary proceedings are pending against the petitioners before the Tribunal for disciplinary proceedings, Coimbatore, the petitioners have been promoted since there is no legal bar or prohibition for promotion during the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings(b) The order of reversion had been passed without due notice to the petitioners and without giving any opportunity to them and hence, it is violative of the principles of natural justice.(c) Though disciplinary proceedings are pending against few officers, they have been promoted whereas the petitioners have been reverted citing disciplinary proceedings, which is a clear discrimination.