1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 04.03.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.DHANAPALAN Writ Petition (MD).No.2587 of 2011 S.T.Rengarajan .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The Government of Tamilnadu rep. by its Principal Secretary, Highways Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Fort St.George, Chennai-9. 2.Chief Engineer (General), Highways, Chepauk, Chennai-5. 3.Divisional Engineer, Highways, Investigation, Madurai. .. Respondents Prayer:- Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to pass final orders in the disciplinary proceedings as referred in their letter No.17848/HL.3/2006-29, dated 16.11.2010, within a time frame fixed by this Court and disburse the petitioner's terminal benefits. For Petitioner : Mr.R.Krishnamoorthy for Mr.R.Subramanian For Respondents: Mr.V.Rajasekaran Special Government Pleader ORDER By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage. 2. Heard Mr.R.Krishnamoorthy for Mr.R.Subramanian learned counsel for petitioner and Mr.V.Rajasekaran, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for respondents. 3. A retired Assistant Engineer of the Highways department has come out with a limited prayer to direct the first respondent to pass final orders in the disciplinary proceedings as referred in their letter dated 16.11.2010, within a time frame. 4. It is the case of the petitioner that he joined the service of the Highways Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, as an Engineer on 03.03.1979 and allowed to retire on 30.06.2003, without prejudice to the proceedings pending against him as he was proceeded against departmentally for charges https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 of allegation of shortage of cement bags and misappropriation of amounts. Ultimately, final orders were passed on 24.04.2002 and 16.03.2006 respectfully. Thereafter, on 24.06.2003 another charge memo was issued to him for the purported shortage of pipes to the tune of Rs.56,100/-, which were alleged to have been taken place during the period 23.02.1992 to 31.08.1994. As there was no conclusion of proceedings, the petitioner has moved this Court by filing a writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.7780 of 2009 and this Court disposed of the writ petition on 10.08.2009 with the following direction; "5.It is seen from the typed set of papers that on 13.08.2008, the petitioner has sent a letter and thereafter on 14.04.2009, another letter was sent by the petitioner requesting the authorities to pass final orders. Even assuming that no representation has been made by the petitioner, the first respondent is bound to pass orders on the proposed punishment given to the petitioner. Hence, the first respondent is directed to pass orders on the proposed punishment as per his proceedings in Letter No.17848/HL3/2006-1, dated 26.05.2008, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order." Thereafter, the said direction of this Court was not complied with. Therefore, the petitioner moved this Court by filing a contempt petition in Cont.P.(MD).No.635 of 2009 and this Court closed the contempt petition on 08.02.2010 with the following order; "3. On notice, the learned Additional Government Pleader would submit that since the earlier enquiry officer appointed to enquire and send a report, did not examine the witnesses and thus, there was a flaw in the enquiry. The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission had advised to conduct a fresh enquiry from where the flaw has crept it and examine the 8 witnesses involved in the case. In consonance with the views of Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, the Chief Engineer (General), Highways Department has appointed one S.Ramakrishnan, Deputy Chief Engineer, Project, Thanjavur as an enquiry officer to enquire into the charges framed against the petitioner. Communication to that effect has also been sent to the petitioner. 4.The learned counsel for the petitioner also admits this position. 5.In view of the above, the Chief Engineer (General) Highways Department, Chepauk, Chennai-5, is directed to direct the enquiry officer appointed by him, to complete the enquiry after giving opportunity to the petitioner and submit a report after following due process of law, on or before 30.04.2010." 5. Thereafter, the first respondent made a statement that since the enquiry officer did not examine the witnesses, they consulted the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, which gave an advice to conduct de-nova enquiry. Accepting the same, they appointed an enquiry officer to proceed with the de- nova enquiry and to complete the same on or before 30.04.2010 as directed by this court to the first respondent. But, the first respondent did not complete the enquiry. Hence, the petitioner sent a representation on 05.06.2010. While that being so, the first respondent in his proceedings dated 15.07.2010 informing the petitioner that the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 Government decided to accept the findings of the enquriy officer and directed him to give a reply and accordingly, he gave a reply on 16.08.2010. Thereafter, the first respondent issued a show cause notice on 16.11.2010, for which he submitted his explanation dated 21.12.2010. Thereafter, nothing has been proceeded further and finding that there is no conclusion of the proceedings and no final orders have been passed, the petitioner represented to the respondents on 28.01.2011 to pass final orders. Even after that there is no conclusion of the proceedings and finding no other alternative remedy is available, the petitioner moved this Court for the above direction. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner in his submissions has consistently pleaded that the petitioner has become ill and therefore, he wanted to see the finality and also to relish the terminal benefits of his service. 7. The learned Special Government Pleader submits that a reasonable time limit may be given to the respondents for passing final orders. 8. In that view of the matter, taking into account the petitioner has come out with a limited prayer to direct the respondents to pass final orders pursuant to the proceedings of the first respondent dated 16.11.2010, without adverting into the merits of the case, I direct the first respondent to conclude the disciplinary proceedings, in accordance with law and on merits, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (P & A) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(C.S) To 1.The Principal Secretary, Government of Tamilnadu Highways Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, Fort St.George, Chennai-9. 2.The Chief Engineer (General), Highways, Chepauk, Chennai-5. 3.The Divisional Engineer, Highways, Investigation, Madurai. +1 CC to the Special Government Pleader, Sr.No.11750 jikr Order made in W.P.(MD).No.2587 of 2011 04.03.2011 TR : 15.03.2011 : 3p/5c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/