LAWS(MAD)-2008-8-206

J MURUGESAN Vs. K DEENABANDHU

Decided On August 28, 2008
J.MURUGESAN Appellant
V/S
K.DEENABANDHU, I.A.S. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. AL. Namasivayam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. L. S. M. Hasan Fizal, learned Government Advocate representing the respondent. The materials available on record were also perused.

(2.) THE petitioner herein had filed a writ petition in W. P. No. 560 of 2008 praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent herein and the Chairman/managing Director, TWAD, Chennai - 5 to conclude the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner in Charge Memo No. 5034/estt. (DP-I)A2/97-19 dated 11. 02. 1998 of the Chairman/managing Director, TWAD Board and the charges initiated in Charge Memo No. 113457/estt (DP)A3/2001 dated 28/1/2005 of the Chairman/managing Director, TWAD Board and pass final orders. Though a larger relief had been prayed for in the writ petition, this court, by an order dated 25/3/2008, chose to issue a direction to the respondent herein to consider the representations of the petitioner dated 21/11/2007 and 11/12/2007 on merits and in accordance with law and dispose of the same within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order of this court. Complaining that the above said direction has been willfully disobeyed, the petitioner has brought-forth this contempt petition for punishing the respondent for the alleged act of contempt.

(3.) IT is true that the respondent did not pass any order on the above said representation till the filing of the contempt petition. Only after receipt of the notice in the contempt petition, the respondent has chosen to pass an order in letter No. 11118/ws. 3/2008-6 dated 22. 08. 2008 stating that the respondent was neither the competent disciplinary authority nor the appellate authority as per TWAD Board Service Regulations, 1972 and that the competent authority, namely the Managing Director, TWAD Board had examined the request of the petitioner in detail and passed final orders. The relevant portion of the order of the respondent herein in letter dated 22. 08. 2008 is as under:-