T SHANMUGASUNDARAM Vs. COMMISSIONER POLLACHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner had approached the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal at Chennai by filing O.A.No.2707 of 1997 challenging the impugned order dated 24.1.1997 of the first respondent imposing punishment of stoppage of increment for three years with cumulative effect. THE said O.A. had been transferred to the file of this Court, on abolition of the Tribunal and renumbered as W.P.No.26477 of 2006.

(2.) THE short facts which are necessary for the disposal of the present writ petition are as follows: THE petitioner started his career in Pollachi Municipality in the year 1975 and in the year 1992 he was promoted as Revenue Assistant. A charge memo dated 6.11.1996 was issued to him and an enquiry was conducted for the same. THE Enquiry Officer seems to have submitted a report and the first respondent, differing with the report of the Enquiry Officer, had passed the impugned order dated 24.1.1997-imposing punishment of stoppage of increment for three years with cumulative effect. Challenging the said punishment, the petitioner had approached the Tribunal by way of O.A. which has been transferred to this Court, as referred to above.

(3.) PER contra, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents contended that the charges against the petitioner are serious in nature and after giving an opportunity to the petitioner, the Enquiry Officer had been appointed and he also filed his report and since the first respondent had not accepted the report, he had dealt with each and every charge levelled against the petitioner and only after taking into account the report of the Enquiry Officer and the explanation of the petitioner, he imposed punishment and hence, there is no procedural lapse in the case on hand. Further, according to the learned Additional Government Pleader, the report of the Enquiry Officer need not be furnished to the petitioner. Thus, the learned Additional Government Pleader sought for dismissal of the writ petition.