1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 12.09.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR W.P.(MD)Nos.9288 & 9289 of 2011 1.K.Balusamy ... Petitioner in WP.9288/2011 2.R.Manickam ... Petitioner in WP.9289/2011 Vs. 1.The Divisional Engineer (Highways) Office of the Divisional Engineer, Construction and Maintenance, West Pirathatchanam Road, Travellers Bungalow, Karur. 2.The Principal Director (Highways), Office of Principal Director, Construction and Maintenance, Chepauk, Chennai-5. ... Respondents in both WPs. Prayer in both WPs.: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order, dated 29.07.2011 in F.vz;.1325/2011/M3 of the 1st respondent and quash the same. For petitioners : Mr.K.Sekar For Respondents : Mr.B.Pugalendhi Spl.Govt.Pleader COMMON ORDER Challenge in the writ petitions, is to the proceedings, dated 29.07.2011, of the Divisional Engineer (Highways), Office of the Divisional, Construction and Maintenance, West Pirathatchanam Road, Travelers Bungalow, Karur, seeking for an explanation from the petitioners, as to why disciplinary action should not be taken against them for filing the writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.3546 of 2011, before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai, without obtaining prior permission. 2. It is the case of the petitioners that they joined the services on 12.11.1997, as Gang Mazdoor in Highways Department, Karur Division and their services was regularized on 11.11.1998 and https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 12.11.1998 respectively. They have passed SSLC. They possesses Light Motor Vehicle licence with Badge, vide Licence No.TN 47/1997/0003836, dated 31.12.1997, and Badge No.8685, dated 11.02.1998 and Light Motor Vehicle licence with Badge vide Licence No.DL.No.199000000787, dated 09.04.1990 and Badge No.203/1991 dated 26.09.1991 respectively. During the month of February 2011, there are 16 vacancies in the post of driver in Highways Department. When the petitioners expected promotion, as drivers, an order, dated 28.02.2008, has been passed, promoting their juniors, as drivers, overlooking the seniority list. Therefore, left with no other option, the petitioners filed W.P.(MD)No.3546 of 2011, along with one Manickam. The said writ petition has been admitted by this Court, on 23.05.2011, and that a counter affidavit has also been filed in April 2011. When the writ petition was pending adjudication, the respondent has issued show-cause notices, seeking for explanation, as to why disciplinary action should not be initiated against the petitioners, for filing the writ petition, without obtaining prior permission. The petitioners have further submitted that, when the matter is subjudice before this Court, issuance of the show-cause notice, is nothing but, a threat posed to the petitioners. Being aggrieved by the arbitrary and high-handed action, the petitioners have preferred the present writ petitions. 3. When the matter came up on 18.08.2011, this Court was pleased to grant interim-stay. On this day, when the matter came up for hearing, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that by misconstruction of rule pertaining to Tamail Nadu Government Conduct Rules, show-cause notice have been issued inadvertently. 4. Mr.B.Pugalendhi, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, seeks time to file counter. 5. Materials on record disclose that, when promotion to the petitioners to the post of drivers, were denied and when their juniors were promoted to the said post, the petitioners have approached this Court, by filing W.P.(MD)No.3546 of 2011 and that the same has been admitted on 25.03.2011 wherein the first respondent has filed a counter affidavit in April 2011. When the writ petition is pending on the file of this Court, as rightly contended by learned counsel for the petitioners, the action of the first respondent, in issuing show-cause notices, amounts of interference with administration of justice. 6. Whenever the of a Government servant/employee is infringed by an attempt over in administrative or quasi judicial order of the appointing authority or disciplinary authority or any other competent authority, it is open to such aggrieved person to prefer a writ petition in the High Court, to ventilate his grievance. In the case on hand, when the petitioners have been overlooked to the post of drivers in Highways Department, they have preferred a writ petition, for which, a counter affidavit has also been filed in April-2011. Pending adjudication, the first respondent, vide proceedings dated 29.07.2011, has directed action, to be taken against them. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 7. A reading of the impugned order shows that it is only a consequential proceedings, pursuant to the proceedings in F.vz;.11010/eph; (4)1/2011/m1/ehs; 18.07.2011 of the Principal Director (Highways), Chennai, The impugned proceedings, dated 29.07.2011 is extracted hereunder:- Bfhl;l bghwpahs;h; mYtyfk; beLq;rhiy (f&g) fUh; F.vz;.1325/2011/M3/ehs;: 29.07.2011 bghUs; - Btiyepjpapy; Cjpak; bgWk; epWtdk; - beLq;rhiyj;Jiw -\ fUh; (be) Bfhl;lk; Jiwapd; mDkjp bgwhky; ePjpkd;wj;jpy; tHf;F bjhlh;e;j gzpahsh;fs; - xGA;F eltof;if Bkw;bfhs;StJ - bjhlh;ghf. ghh;it - 1) Kjd;ik naf;Feh; (be) brd;id-5 mth;fspd; F.vz;.11010/eph; (4)1/2011/m1/ehs; 18.07.2011. 2) brd;id cah;ePjpkd;wj;jpd; kJiu fpisapy; tHf;F vz;. W.P.(MD)No.3546 of 2011. ghh;it - 1y; fhZk; Kjd;ik naf;Feh; (be) brd;id-5 mth;fspd Fwpg;ghizapy; beLq;rhiyj;Jiwapy; Btiy epjpapy; Cjpak; bgWk; epWtdj;ijr;rhh;e;j gzpahsh;fs; Jiwapd; mDkjp bgwhky; tHf;F bjhlh;e;jth;fs; kPJ XGA;F eltof;if Bkw;bfhz;L mjd; tpguj;ij mDg;gpitf;FkhW Bfl;fg;gl;Ls;sJ. fUh; beLq;rhiyj;Jiw Bfhl;lj;ijr;rhh;e;j fUh; fpU&;zuhag[uk; cl;Bfhl;lA;fspy; gzpg[hpa[k; j/bg. fe;jrhkp kw;Wk; jpU.Mh;.khzpf;fk; j/bg. uh$ypA;fk; Mfpa nuz;L rhiyg;gzpahsh;fSk;, rhiyg;gzpahsh; gjtpapypUe;J gjtp cah;t [ Kyk; Xl;Leh; gjtpf;F gjtp cah;t[ tHA;fg;gLk;BghJ jA;fis tpl nisBahUf;F gjtp cah;t[ tHA;fg;gl;Ls;sJ vd bjhptpj;J Jiwapd; mDkjp bgwhky; brd;id cah;ePjpkd;w; kJiu fpisapy; tHf;F (tHf;F vz;. W.P.(MD)No.3546 of 2011). bjhlh;e;Js;sjhy; jA;fs; kPJ Vd; xGA;F eltof;if Bkw;bfhs;sf;TlhJ vd;gjw;fhd tpsf;fj;jpid nf;fojk; fpilf;fg;bgw;w VG jpdA;fSf;Fs; cjtpf;Bfhl;lg; bghwpahsh; (be) (f(k)g) Kyk; mDg;gpitf;FkhW Bfl;Lf;bfhs;sg;gLfpwhh;fs;. Xk;/-m.KDrhkp, Bfhl;lg;bghwpahsh; beLq;rhiy (f(k)g) fUh; https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4 8.The contention of the learned counsel for the respondents, that it is only a misconstruction of provision relating to misconduct and therefore, show-cause notices have been issued inadvertently and that it was not done intentionally is accepted. 9.In such view of the same, the impugned orders of the first respondent, dated 29.07.2011, is liable to be set aside and accordingly, set aside and the writ petitions are allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Crl.Side) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Divisional Engineer (Highways) Office of the Divisional Engineer, Construction and Maintenance, West Pirathatchanam Road, Travellers Bungalow, Karur. 2.The Principal Director (Highways), Office of Principal Director, Construction and Maintenance, Chepauk, Chennai-5. +1 CC to Mr.I.Suthakaran, Advocate (SR.No.31106) +1 CC to Special Government Pleader (SR.No.31121) W.P.(MD)Nos.9288 & 9289 of 2011 12.09.2011 NB/MPK NSV/15.9.11/4P/5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/