V MOORTHY Vs. SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL PRISON Ï¿½ 3

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE prayer in the writ petition is to quash the order of termination passed by the first respondent dated 31.8.1998, confirmed by the second respondent by order dated 2.12.1998 and for a direction to reinstate the petitioner in service with all consequential benefits.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that he was selected as Grade-II Police Constable by the Tamil Nadu Uniformed Services Recruitment Board. Petitioner joined duty on 27.3.1998 at Central Prison, Chennai-3. He continued in the said post till 31.8.1998, i.e., the date of order of dismissal from service passed against him.

(3.) THE respondents have filed counter affidavit wherein it is stated that for the charge memo dated 21.8.1998 the petitioner was suspended pending enquiry and no final order is passed with regard to the second charge memo dated 5.6.1998 since the petitioner has not filed remarks for the enquiry officer's report, and in the enquiry conducted for the second charge memo, the petitioner failed to attend. THE dismissal order was passed for the proven charges issued in the first charge memo. THE minutes of the Enquiry Officer was drawn for the two charges and copy of the same was forwarded to the petitioner and he originally sought for seven days time and again requested further time of seven days and once again requested 15 days time by stating that he could not be in a position to give reply. Since no reply was received, the Disciplinary Authority examined the Enquiry Officer's report carefully and after finding that both the charges are proved, imposed the punishment of dismissal from service by order dated 31.8.1998. THE appeal preferred against the said order was also dismissed. THE Disciplinary Authority, taking note of the seriousness of the proved charges, passed an order of dismissal and there is no illegality in the said order of dismissal.