R KANDASAMY Vs. TREASURY OFFICER COIMBATORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was an Accountant in the Sub Treasury Office, Tiruppur. He was placed under suspension on 19.02.2004 on the ground of demanding and accepting bribe of Rs.1200/- from one pensioner. THE petitioner was proceeded both departmentally as well as by criminal proceedings. THE criminal case was tried by the learned Special Judge -cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore in S.C.C.No,3 of 2006. THE petitioner was questioned on 25.06.2008 under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. THE verdict from the Criminal Court is yet to be pronounced.

(2.) IN the meanwhile, the petitioner was simultaneously proceeded departmentally also. The petitioner was given a charge memo under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules dated 22.07.2007. The petitioner had participated in the enquiry. The Enquiry Officer had finally given his report holding that the petitioner was guilty of the charges by his report dated 20.07.2009. IN order to give opportunity to the petitioner, the report of the Enquiry Officer was furnished to the petitioner with a covering letter dated 10.08.2009 asking the petitioner to give his explanation on the Enquiry Officer's report. The petitioner has come forward to challenge this report on some untenable grounds.

(3.) EVEN the question as to whether due to pendency of the criminal proceedings, any disciplinary action has to be stalled, came up for consideration before the Supreme Court in Indian Overseas Bank, Anna Salai vs. P. Ganesan and Others reported in 2007 (5) CTC 632. The Supreme Court, after referring to the previous judgments on the issue, has held in para 20 as follows: