S.PUSHKALA KUMARI Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The charge memo, dated 07.11.2014, issued by the third respondent, is under challenge in the present writ petition.

(2.) The writ petitioner was appointed as Assistant Draughtsman and retired from service on 31.05.2014. On account of the vigilance enquiry instituted against the writ petitioner, a charge memo was issued against her in proceedings, dated 07.11.2014. The charges are extracted hereunder:

(3.) The allegations set out in the charge memo against the writ petitioner are serious in nature. The Annexure-II to the charge memo provides statement of allegations, namely, imputations of misconduct. Annexure-III denotes the list of documents and the form of questionnaire was also enclosed along with the charge memo. Thus, there is no infirmity as such in the impugned charge memo issued against the writ petitioner. Instead of submitting her explanations and defend her case by availing the opportunity, the writ petitioner has chosen to file the present writ petition by stating that she is noway connected with the allegations set out in the impugned charge memo.