1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.08.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH W.A.(MD).No.767 of 2011 C.Nainar : Appellant Vs. 1.Joint Director (Personnel), of School Education, Chennai-6. 2.District Educational Officer, Tenkasi, Tirunelveli District. : Respondents PRAYER: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 29.06.2011 made in W.P.(MD)No.3946 of 2006 on the file of this Court. WP(MD)No.3946 of 2006 presented to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying this Court to issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by the first respondent in his proceedings in R.C.No.0342424/C2/Sec C35/2006-1 dated 11.04.2006 and quash the same. For Appellant : Mr.C.A.Selvaraj Senior Counsel For M/s.C.S.Associates For Respondents : Mr.K.Mahendran Special Government Pleader JUDGMENT [Judgment of the Court was delivered BY P.JYOTHIMANI, J] The Writ Appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 29.06.2011 made in W.P.(MD)No.3946 of 2006, by which, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the Writ Petition. The Writ Petition was filed challenging the charge memo issued against the appellant on the ground that the charge is vague. On a reference to the charge, it is very clear that the charge is of misappropriation to the extent of Rs.7,000/-. One cannot presume that the charge is vague, especially when the specific ground has been made in the charge. If the grievance of the appellant is that in the statement of allegation, necessary particulars have not been given, it is for the appellant to take it as a matter of defence during the time of departmental proceedings. 2. In such view of the matter, we see no reason to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge dated 29.06.2011 and the Writ Appeal fails and the same stands dismissed accordingly. However, since it is stated that an explanation has already been submitted to the charge memo, the authority concerned shall conduct enquiry and complete the disciplinary https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 proceedings, after giving opportunity to the parties, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(C.S) To 1.The Joint Director (Personnel), of School Education, Chennai-6. 2.The District Educational Officer, Tenkasi, Tirunelveli District. +1. CC to M/s.C.S.Associates, Advocate, SR.No.27707 +1. CC to the Special Government Pleader, SR.No. 27931 SML Judgment made in W.A.(MD).No.767 of 2011 Dated:- 16.08.2011 TR : 17.08.2011: 2p/5c : IT https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/