R SHANMUGAM Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT REVENUE DEPARTMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides. The two writ petitions are filed by one and the same person. In the first writ petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the order, dated 4. 9. 2003, which is a charge memo framed by the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings, Salem in the departmental enquiry No. 9 of 2002 against the petitioner, who was formerly working as a District Adi Dravidar Welfare Officer, Kancheepuram.

(2.) THE charges were framed not only against the petitioner, but also against eight other persons, including two Assistants working in the office, three Special Tahsildars, one Office Superintendent, one Special Deputy Collector and one Headmaster. The charge against the petitioner was he was involved in a scam of preparing and signing Pay Fixation orders with the connivance of other officers by making insertion and alteration in the service book of teachers, Headmasters and Wardens in Kancheepuram and Thiruvallur Districts and also creating huge loss to the Government by making ineligible claims in respect of 111 beneficiaries and misappropriated a sum of Rs. 1,06,11,617/ -. They were accused of not maintaining absolute integrity and devotion to duty in Government service and their conduct is unbecoming of a Government servant.

(3.) THE petitioner also filed a reply to the charge memo. The case of the petitioner was that the charge memo has been framed subsequent to the time frame fixed by the Tribunal and therefore, it is invalid. It was further submitted that the order passed by the Tribunal in O. A. Nos. 5498 and 5677 of 2000, dated 20. 8. 2002 has become final. Since no appeal has been filed, the petitioner cannot be proceeded with. It was also stated that the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings has initiated proceedings long after the Tribunal's order.