R SUNDARARAJAN Vs. SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL PRISON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Original Application in O.A.No,4983 of 2002 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") is now Writ Petition in W.P.No,7550 of 2007 before this Court.

(2.) THE petitioner was employed as Assistant Jailor during the year 1997. THE petitioner was retired from service in the year 2006, after reaching the age of superannuation. Photographs were published in the Tamil weekly magazine, 'Nakkeeran', in its issue (10-17) June 1997, showing the inmates of the Prison in Lalkudi were playing cards, fighting each other with knife and they were reading obscene magazines. It is the case of the Department that one Mr.Amarnath Singh, Grade-I Warder, who was involved in taking Ganja within the jail and who faced disciplinary action for the same, conspired with another Grade-I Warder Mr.Palanisamy to bring disrepute to the Institution. Pursuant to the conspiracy hatched, Mr.Amarnath Singh and Mr.Palanisamy had clandestinely taken camera, knives, obscene books and play cards, with the help of Mr.Pichaimuthu and Mr.Syed Ayub, Grade-I Warders. THE camera was handed over to one Mr.Sundar, Convict No.1446 and he took photos of other inmates. THE aforesaid four persons made the inmates of the prison to act as if they were playing cards, fighting each other with knives, reading obscene books, etc. THE said acting was photographed by one Mr.Sundar, Convict No.1446 and these photos were published in 'Nakkeeran'. THE aforesaid four persons wanted to bring disrepute to the Institution, by publishing the photos in the Tamil Weekly magazine 'Nakkeeran'.

(3.) THE petitioner filed O.A.No,5639 of 2000 to quash the aforesaid order dated 08.05.2000. On 20.03.2001, the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal quashed the order dated 08.05.2000 and felt that the punishment was too excessive and remanded the matter to respondents to consider the matter relating to the quantum of punishment, only. While passing such an order, the Tribunal directed the Department to reinstate the petitioner in service. Pursuant to the order of Tribunal, the petitioner was reinstated in service by an order dated 18.06.2001. THEreafter, he was issued with a notice dated 30.07.2001 by the Inspector General of Prisons, Chennai, to appear for a fresh enquiry.