TAHSIDAR PANRUTI Vs. A KRISHNAMURTHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. Raja Kalifulla, learned Government Pleader in support of this appeal. Mr. S. Vijayakumar, learned counsel appears for the respondent.

(2.) THE second appellant - Revenue Divisional Officer, Cuddalore, had issued a notice to the respondent under Rule 17(c) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules (for short 'the Rules'), asking him to show cause as to why he should not be dismissed from service in view of his conviction in Special Case No,3 of 2000 under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. THE respondent filed a petition to challenge that show-cause notice and his principal submission was that the notice showed that the appellants were pre-determined in dismissing him from service.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, relied upon a judgment of this Court in the case of M. Devendran -vs- THE Director, Tamil Nadu Fire and Rescue Services, Egmore, Tamil Nadu reported in (2006) 1 MLJ 40, wherein after referring to this very rule, a learned Single Judge has taken the view that such a communication indicates a pre-judged approach to the things and, therefore, he had interfered into that communication. THE learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the order passed by the second appellant is contrary to the view taken by different Judges of this Court and, therefore, the learned Single Judge was right in taking the view that he has taken.