STATE OF TAMIL NADU Vs. C KRISHNAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent, who was Superintendent of Unit Office, Regional Transport Office, was proceeded departmentally vide charge sheet in Memo R.No.75848/V4/05 dated 4.5.2006. He challenged the same on different grounds including the ground that no case has been made out under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules (hereinafter referred to as the "Rules").

(2.) THE learned Judge, by the impugned judgment dated 3.9.2007, having noticed the charge sheet, held that no dishonest motive has been noticed in the charge sheet and even though irregularity or negligence was alleged in the charge sheet, no question of framing charges under Rule 17(b) would arise and in the facts and circumstances, the alleged charges would attract only Rule 17(a) of the Rules and directed the competent authority to proceed under Rule 17(a) of the Rules, instead of Rule 17(b) of the Rules. Having noticed that the employee was to retire in the month of February 2008, the Department was also directed to consider the case of the employee for promotion also. Against the aforesaid judgment, the Department (State) has preferred this appeal.

(3.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties and noticed the rival contention and also perused the records.