S DEVA ARUL Vs. EXECUTIVE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) W.P.Nos.4373 of 1999 and 770 of 2000 have been filed by one Deva Arul. Likewise, W.P.Nos.4374 of 1999 and 771 of 2000 have been filed by one Raja Sundar Singh.

(2.) IN W.P.No,4373 of 1999, the prayer of the petitioner is for a direction to the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service with backwages together with interest, continuity of service and other allowances. Similar prayer has also been made by the petitioner in W.P.No,4374 of 1999. Notice of motion was ordered in both the writ petitions on 17.3.1999. Subsequently, they were admitted on 07.7.1999. IN the applications for interim injunction, this Court by an order dated 07.7.1999 passed the following order:-

(3.) MR.S.Thankasivan, learned counsel appearing for the first respondent had also filed a typed set of papers containing the circumstances that led to the action being taken against the petitioners. MR.Amalraj, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that before filing these writ petitions, the petitioners earlier came up against the order of suspension dated 16.7.1997 and 06.3.1998. This court in W.P.No.12897 of 1997 directed the subsistence allowance to be paid to the first petitioner Deva Arul. Once again in W.P.Nos.12897 and 3683 of 1998 by an order dated 16.9.1998, this Court set aside the suspension order on the ground that no suspension can be made without framing charge memo. It was subsequent to the said order, the two writ petitions have been filed, viz., W.P.Nos.4373 and 4374 of 1999 seeking for restoration to service.