P MOKKARAJ Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

(2.) THE petitioner had joined the police service as a Sub Inspector of Police, armed Reserve Unit, in the year 1971. Thereafter, he was promoted, as an inspector of Police, Armed Reserve, in the year 1987. Later, while he was working at Thallakulam Police Station, Madurai City, he was served with a charge memo, under Rule 3 (b) of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Service Rules, in p. R. No. 124/95, containing two charges, which are as follows: "1) Highly reprehensible conduct in having utilised his subordinates to collect illegal gratification from the lorry cleaners TNK 6757, KLV 9052 and TN-72 2925, on 8. 5. 1992, at about 20. 30 hrs and 20. 45 hrs at Melapalayam road junction in tirunelveli Nagercoil High Road. 2) Highly reprehensible conduct in not having inspected the lorries TNK 6757, KLV 9052, on 8. 5. 1992, at about 20. 30 hrs at melapalayam Road Junction in Tirunelveli Nagercoil High Road and allowed the lorries to proceed further after collection of illegal gratification. "

(3.) THE charges had been framed based on the statements of one Mariyaiah, district Inspection Cell Officer, Tirunelveli District, who had neither seized the cash claimed to have been collected by the petitioner from two lorry cleaners, nor had he booked a criminal case against the petitioner and the others, under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The alleged incident is said to have occurred, on 8. 5. 1992, whereas, the disciplinary action had been initiated in the year 1995, after a lapse of three years. The charges are vague and ambiguous. The delay in framing the charges had not been explained. The P. R. No. under which the charges had been issued had been subsequently changed as p. R. No. 33/98 and then as P. R. No. 216/98.