1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 05.09.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR W.P.(MD).Nos.9911 to 9913 of 2011 And M.P.(MD).Nos. 1,1,1 and 2,2,2 of 2011 S.Seenivasan ... Petitioner in W.P.No.9911/11 S.Sivasubramanian ... Petitioner in W.P.No.9912/11 N.Suruliappan ... Petitioner in W.P.No.9913/11 -Vs- The Revenue Divisional Officer, Periyakulam, Theni District. ... Respondent in W.P.Nos.9911&9912/11 Agricultural Production Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government Agriculture (AA-2) Department Secretariat, Chennai. ... Respondent in W.P.No.9913/11 Prayer in W.P.Nos.9911 and 9912: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to order made in Na.Ka.No.4637/2008/A-2 dated 04.05.2010 and 11.05.2010 passed by the respondent and quash the same. Prayer in W.P.No.9913/11: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records relating to charge memo made in Letter No.651/AA- 2/2007-18 dated 20.12.2010 issued by the respondent and quash the same. *** For Petitioner : Mr.Pala.Ramasamy (in all the cases) For Respondents: Mr.S.Chandrasekar, Government Advocate (in all the cases) COMMON ORDER The Writ Petitions have been filed to quash the proceedings of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Periyakulam, Theni District, the respondent in W.P.Nos.9911 and 9912 of 2011 in Na.Ka.No.4637/2008/A2, dated 04.05.2011 and 11.05.2011 and the proceeding of the Agricultural Production Commissioner, Principal Secretary to Government, Agriculture (AA-2) Department, Secretariat, Chennai - 600 009, respondent in W.P.No.9913 of 2011 issued in letter No.651/AA-2/2007-18 dated 20.12.2010, by which, disciplinary action has been taken against the petitioner in W.P.No.9913 of 2011 under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. 2. According to the petitioners in W.P.Nos.9911 and 9912, they entered service as Village Administrative Officers in the years 1986 and 1984 respectively and the petitioner in W.P.No.9913 of 2011, he entered https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 service as a Assistant Agricultural Officer. The Government framed charges, which are impugned in these Writ Petitions, alleging that the Village Administrative Officers and Assistant Agricultural Officers alleged to have issued false certificates in the names of fictitious persons, with false particulars without making inspection and without verifying survey number of the lands, which facilitated middle men and traders to sell copra in Theni, Madurai District Central Co-operative Bank (in respect of the petitioners in W.P.Nos.9911 and 9912 of 2011) and Veerapandi Primary Agricultural Co-operative Bank, Veerapandi (in respect of the petitioner in W.P.No.9913 of 2011), between 1999-2000, 2000-2001 and 2000-2001 respectively. 3. The petitioners have further submitted that earlier, criminal cases were registered against the subordinates in the Agriculture Department and Revenue Department and that the same were withdrawn as per G.O. 210, Agriculture Department AA-2, dated 09.10.2009. Pursuant to which, the impugned disciplinary proceedings have been initiated under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. The impugned charge memo have been challenged mainly on the ground of inordinate delay. 4. Reliance has been placed on the decisions of this Court in P.V.Mahadevan Vs. M.D. Tamil Nadu Housing Board, reported in 2005(4) CTC 403, in W.A.Nos. 586 and 587 of 2007, dated 05.11.2007; in W.A.No. 610 of 2008, dated 06.03.2009; in T.N.Principal Secretary Home (SC) Department, Chennai and another Vs. R.Ramarajan, IPS Superintendent of Police T.N.Commando Ch-28 and other, reported in 2009(3) TLNJ 132 (Civil); and in B.K.Gunasekaran V. State of T.N. reported in 2010(7) MLJ 161. 5. Attention of this Court has also been invited to an order made in W.P.No. 8924 of 2006 & 6508 of 2009, dated 17.03.2010 in L.Frederick Jayaseelan Vs. The Government of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Agricultural Production Commissioner and Secretary to Government and others), wherein this Court, after considering the facts and placing reliance on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.V.Mahadevan Vs. M.D. Tamil Nadu Housing Board (stated supra) and other cases, has quashed the departmental proceedings initiated against the petitioners therein. At paragraph No.8 of the order, a learned Single Judge of this Court has held as follows:- "In view of the judicial dictum laid down by the Apex Court, applying the same to the facts of the present case, there is absolutely no difficulty to conclude that the order of suspension as well as the impugned charge memo are illegal. Since the respondent has not chosen to explain the reason for delay, I am of the considered view that the impugned charge memo is liable to be set aside." 6. There is no quarrel over the similarity of the facts, with the one stated supra. Even Mr.T.S.Mohamed Mohideen, learned Additional Government Pleader, who took notice for the respondent in all the writ petitions, fairly submitted that disciplinary action initiated against the officials of the Revenue Department for the alleged delinquency, have https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 been quashed in many cases. No appeal seemed to have been filed against the order made in W.P.Nos. 8924 of 2006 and 6508 of 2009, dated 17.03.2010. 7. Considering the submissions of both sides and after going through the materials on record and on perusal of the order made in the abovesaid Writ Petitions in W.P.Nos. 8924 of 2006 and 6508 of 2009, dated 17.03.2010, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioners are entitled to the benefit of the orders stated supra. The facts are similar and there is no explanation for the inordinate delay. 8. For the reasons stated supra, the impugned orders are set aside and the Writ Petitions stand allowed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are also closed. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (RTI) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar (C.S) To 1. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Periyakulam, Theni District. 2. The Agricultural Production Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government, Agriculture (AA-2) Department, Secretariat, Chennai. W.P.(MD).Nos.9911 to 9913 of 2011 And M.P.(MD).Nos. 1,1,1 and 2,2,2 of 2011 05.09.2011 RR RJ/26.9.11 3p/3c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/