T.GAJENDRAN Vs. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition is directed against the order passed by the first respondent vide G.O.(2D) No.97, Home (Police.IVA) Department, dated 25.03.2013 confirming the order of punishment passed by the second respondent by the impugned proceedings dated 09.03.2007.

(2.) The brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of this Writ Petition are as follows:

(3.) The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the charge against the petitioner was not proved. When the Head Constable who was charged along with the petitioner was exonerated from the charges, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the punishment imposed on the petitioner is illegal. The learned Counsel further submitted that the punishment imposed is disproportionate to the charges and that the order of the first respondent is liable to be quashed. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner further submitted that the Writ Petition earlier was disposed of with a direction to the first respondent to consider the evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.2. Since P.W.1 and P.W.2 turned hostile, their evidence have not been considered by the first respondent. Since the case revolves around the complaint of P.W.1, namely, the owner of vehicle and P.W.2 the driver of the vehicle, the first respondent ought to have considered the fact that P.W.1 and P.W. 2 turned hostile as a relevant and material circumstance to disprove the charge against the petitioner. The learned Counsel further submitted that the findings of the Enquiry Officer is totally perverse and that the order passed by the second respondent imposing the major punishment is not warranted.