1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 19.09.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH W.A.(MD).No.883 of 2011 C.Kaliasam : Appellant (Petitioner) Vs. 1.The District Revenue Officer, Pudukkottai District. 2.The District Collector, Pudukkottai District. : Respondents (Respondents) PRAYER: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 20.07.2011 made in W.P.(MD).No.8048 of 2011 on the file of this Court, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to this proceedings in Na.Ka.A2/1542/2011 dt.7.2.2011 under Rule 17(b) of Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Discipline & Appeal Rules) and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents to promote the petitioner as Tahsildar. For Appellant : Mr.J.Murugesan For Respondents : Mr.K.Mahendran Special Government Pleader JUDGMENT [Judgment of the Court was delivered BY P.JYOTHIMANI, J] This Writ Appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 20.07.2011 made in W.P.(MD).No.8048 of 2011, by which the Writ Petition filed by the appellant herein challenging a charge memo dated 07.02.2011 issued to him under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, came to be dismissed by the learned Single Judge. 2. The main contention, as submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant, is that issuance of charge memo at the time when the appellant was entitled for promotion to the next category is illegal. Moreover, according to him, when the charges are illegal, it is open to him to challenge the same under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. He has also relied on a Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India v. Kunisetty Satyanarayana reported in AIR 2007 SC 906. Even In the said Judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Paragraph No.14, in clear terms, has held as follows:- 14. The reason why ordinarily a writ petition should not be entertained against a mere show-cause notice or charge-sheet is that at that stage the writ petition may be held to be premature. A mere charge-sheet or show-cause notice does not give rise to any cause of action, because it does not amount to an adverse order which affects the rights of any party unless https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 the same has been issued by a person having no jurisdiction to do so. It is quite possible that after considering the reply to the show-cause notice or after holding an enquiry the authority concerned may drop the proceedings and/or hold that the charges are not established. It is well settled that a writ lies when some right of any party is infringed. A mere show-cause notice or charge-sheet does not infringe the right of any one. It is only when a final order imposing some punishment or otherwise adversely affecting a party is passed, that the said party can be said to have any grievance. 3. Moreover, it is not as if the appellant has been left in lurch. It is only a charge memo, for which the appellant has to submit his reply and thereafter, it is for the authorities concerned to pass final orders. Therefore, we have no hesitation to come to the conclusion that the reasoning given by the learned Single Judge does not require any interference at the hands of this Court. 4. In such view of the matter, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. However, as requested by the learned counsel for the appellant, the appellant is permitted to submit his explanation to the impugned charge memo dated 07.02.2011 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and thereafter, it is for the respondents to conduct enquiry in the manner known to law and complete the same as expeditiously as possible, in any event within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of explanation from the appellant, after giving opportunity to him. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The District Revenue Officer, Pudukkottai District. 2.The District Collector, Pudukkottai District. +1cc to Special Government Pleader, SR.No.32234 NB GH : 23.09.2011 : 2p/4c JUDGMENT MADE IN W.A.(MD).No.883 of 2011 19.09.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/