1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.06.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VENKATARAMAN W.P.(MD)No.6069 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 K.Karuppiah : Petitioner Vs. 1.The Chairman and Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd., Thiru.Vi.Ka.Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. 2.The General Manager, Tamil Nadu Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd., Thiru.Vi.Ka.Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. 3.Mr.A.Subramanian, Superintendent, Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd., Madurai Branch,Madurai. : Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to complete the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the third respondent vide Show Cause Notice issued in Rc.No.4004/A3/2009, dated 12.06.2009 and pass final order based on the petitioner's representation dated 10.12.2009 within the time limit that may be stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu For Respondents 1&2 : Mr.S.Chandrasekar Government Advocate ORDER Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 and 2. 2. The petitioner has come up with the present Writ Petition for a Mandamus, directing the first respondent to complete the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the third respondent, in pursuant to the show cause notice issued to the third respondent dated 12.06.2009 and pass final orders, by considering his representation dated 10.12.2009, within a time fixed by this Court. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that on a complaint given by him, a show cause notice was issued to the third respondent. However, no final orders have been passed and hence, the petitioner has come up with the present Writ Petition. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the first respondent has to complete the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the third respondent, within a short span of time. Since no steps have been taken, the petitioner has come up with the present Writ Petition. 5. While considering the said submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, I am of the considered view that on the complaint given by the petitioner, an action was taken by the first respondent and it has been so informed to him by proceeding dated 18.06.2009. It is stated in the said communication that departmental proceedings have been initiated against the third respondent. While so, it is not for the petitioner to dictate terms to the first respondent to complete the disciplinary proceedings within a particular period. The first respondent, having taken action against the third respondent, will definitely proceed against the third respondent. 6. Taking such view, I am not inclined to grant the relief that has been sought for by the petitioner and hence, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed. However, there is no order as to costs. Sd/- Deputy Registrar(Accounts) /TRUE COPY/ Assistant Registrar To 1.The Chairman and Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd., Thiru.Vi.Ka.Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. 2.The General Manager, Tamil Nadu Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd., Thiru.Vi.Ka.Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. +1cc to Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu, Advocate SR.No.18881 +1cc to The Special Govt.Pleader SR.No.19256 Order made in W.P.(MD)No.6069 of 2011 SML PA/29.06.2011/2P/5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/