R MADHAVAN Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITION filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus as stated therein. The petitioner has come forward with this writ petition praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings of the first respondent issued in Letter No.8386/E1/2008-1, RD&PR Department dated 03.06.2008 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to drop further proceedings based on the charge memorandum dated 17.09.2007 in proceedings Roc No.51311/07/DPC-22, dated 17.09.2007.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is as follows:- When the petitioner herein was working as Assistant Director of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, the second respondent herein issued a charge memo in Roc. No.51311/07/DPC-22 dated 17.09.2007, based on the complaint given by one D. Kalavathi claiming herself as the second wife of the petitioner. THE charges against the petitioner are as follows:-

(3.) MR. Gurunathan, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents submitted that preliminary enquiry was conducted, a prima facie case was made out against the petitioner and thereafter, the charge memo under Rule 17 (b) was issued that the documents produced by the said Kalavadhi are clinching to prove that the petitioner married her when the first marriage was subsisting that the said documents were not properly considered by the enquiry officer that the first respondent/disciplinary authority has every right to disagree with the findings of the enquiry officer when the enquiry officer failed to consider the valid evidence and rightly issued the second show cause notice that the petitioner was allowed to retire reserving the right of the respondents to proceed against him pursuant to the charge memo, hence, the date of his superannuation no way assumes importance and prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.