V MURUGAN Vs. COMMISSIONER MADURAI CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY consent of both the counsel, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) THE petitioner was a Health Assistant working under the respondent corporation and later on, he was re-designated as Sanitary Inspector. His due date of retirement, on attaining the age of superannuation, was 31.12.2006. But, he was placed under suspension by the respondent by order dated 28.12.2006 on the ground that an enquiry into the grave charges against him is contemplated and such suspension is necessary in the public interest. THE petitioner seeks to quash the said order.

(3.) THE contention of the respondent in the counter is that there are certain grave charges contemplated against the petitioner and on that ground and also having regard to the necessity to place him under suspension, the impugned order came to be passed. THE learned counsel for the respondent would submit that though no order, retaining the petitioner in service, was passed by the respondent, such an order was passed by the Secretary to Government by his proceedings in VO2/40595/06, dated 28.12.2006. Since the Government is the higher Authority over the Appointing Authority i.e., the respondent herein, the said order of the Government satisfies the requirement of Rule 56(1)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Government Fundamental Rules, and thus, the order of suspension holds-good, which does not require any interference at the hands of this Court.