S. MUTHUKRISHNAN Vs. CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

(2.) It appears, the petitioner, while serving as a Junior Engineer, remained unauthorisedly absent, for which, a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him. In such disciplinary proceeding, in spite of an opportunity given, the petitioner did not participate and, as such, the authority proceeded ex parte against the petitioner and passed an order of his dismissal from service with effect from 12.04.2005. The said order was challenged by the petitioner before the appellate authority, which was dismissed. As against the same, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition, challenging the order of dismissal in the disciplinary proceedings, on the ground that it is violative of salutory principle of natural justice and audi alteram partem and, as such, not sustainable in the eye of law. So also, the punishment imposed being disproportionate to the nature of delinquenc needs to be revisited.

(3.) Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents, indicating that in spite of the adequate opportunity being given, the petitioner did not participate in the proceeding. The authority has also followed the rules governing Chennai Metro Water Supply and Sewerage Board (Disciplinary and Appeal) Rules,1978. Hence, it cannot be said that the impugned order is bad being violative of principles of natural justice. So far as the imposition of punishment is concerned, the stand of the respondents is that since the petitioner was not willing to serve and he did not participate in the proceedings, the authority, having no other alternative, passed the order of dismissal from service and, as such, the same can in no circumstances be said to be shockingly disproportionate. Hence, the same needs no interference in this writ petition.