K.RASU Vs. AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The charge memo dated 22.3.2017 issued by the second respondent, the order of suspension issued in G.O.(3D) No.7, Agriculture (AA2) Department dated 25.1.2018 and the order issued in G.O.(3D) No.10, Agriculture (AA2) Department, dated 31.1.2018 issued by the first respondent, not allowing the writ petitioner to retire from service, are under challenge in the present writ petition.

(2.) The writ petitioner was holding the post of Deputy Director of Agriculture and on the eve of his retirement, the writ petitioner was placed under suspension on account of the pendency of the departmental disciplinary proceedings initiated against him in proceedings dated 22.3.2017.

(3.) The learned counsel for the writ petitioner states that pursuant to the initiation of departmental disciplinary proceedings, a charge memo was issued in proceedings dated 22.3.2017. The writ petitioner was placed under suspension on 22.6.2017. Challenging the said order of suspension, the writ petitioner filed WP No.16314 of 2017 and on account of the interim order of stay granted in that writ petition, the writ petitioner was subsequently reinstated into service.