M SOUNDARARAJAN Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR RAMANATHAPURAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is has been served with a charge under Rule 17-b of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, dated 02.01.2009 for an allegation of receipt of illegal gratification of Rs.3,000/-. He has filed the present writ petition to quash the charges in view of the pendency of the criminal case in C.C.No.8 of 2005 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ramanathapuram.

(2.) ON 24.09.2004, the petitioner was arrested by the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Department and a criminal case was registered against him. It is the case of the petitioner that a sum of Rs.3,000/-, the alleged illegal gratification was recovered from the pocket of Mr.Nagarathinam, a Village Assistant who is the accused No.2 in the above said criminal case. The alleged demand and acceptance is only by the Village Assistant and the petitioner has no connection whatsoever to the said allegation. In order to escape from the clutches of the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Department, the said Village Assistant has falsely implicated the petitioner. Investigation has been completed by the police and the charge sheet has also been filed. The investigation of the disciplinary proceedings and the criminal case founded on the same set of facts is illegal. As the offence involves question of law, the respondents are awaiting the outcome of the decision in C.C.No.8 of 2005 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ramanathapuram. If the petitioner discloses his defence as to how the complainant Mr.P.A.Karuppaiah is aggrieved in the discharge of the petitioner's official duty and how he is having grudge against the petitioner in the disciplinary proceedings, the exposure of his defence in the departmental enquiry would certainly affect the criminal case. Therefore, he has sought for a certiorari to quash the departmental proceedings.

(3.) IT is further submitted that the District Collector being the disciplinary authority has framed charges against the petitioner under rule 17-b of the Tamil nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules and issued a charge memo dated 02.1.2009, not only for the alleged corrupt activity but also for failure to maintain integrity while on duty as per the conduct rules. That apart, the petitioner has failed to take necessary steps to prevent rearing of fish in Government land by Mr.P.A.Karuppiah, Rameshwaram and also failed to levy and collect any penal charges from the occupant of the Government land for misusing the land. Therefore, the petitioner was charge sheeted for lack of devotion to duty. IT is further submitted that it is not necessary for the petitioner to be present at the time of acceptance of bribe amount in the house of the complainant, when he had already given instructions to the Village Assistant to go to the complainants house and collect the bribe amount on his behalf. He further submitted that there is no bar for initiating disciplinary proceedings when the petitioner is facing a criminal case before the Court of competent jurisdiction. He further submitted that as per G.O.Ms.No.124, dated 22.02.1983, the Government has issued instructions to contemplate simultaneous departmental as well as criminal action against government servants in respect of various offences committed by them. Criminal action is pursued with reference to the offences, whereas, departmental action is initiated based on the lapses committed by the Government servants in the course of discharging their official duties as well as charges of corruption.