IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated: 05.02.2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR Writ Petition No.33693 of 2006 D.Thangavel ..Applicant -Vs.- 1. Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Chepauk, Chennai-5. 2. Deputy Commissioner (CT), Chennai (North) Division, Chennai-6. ..Respondents Original Application No.9750 of 1998 was filed before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench praying to quash the punishment of stoppage of increment for 2 years without cumulative effect passed by the second respondent in his Ref.A2/11291/94 dated 21.3.1996 and the consequential order of the first respondent in his Proc.No.Y2/64626/96 dated 16.9.1998 with all consequential monetary and service benefits. Since the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal was abolished, the O.A. was received by transfer and numbered as Writ Petition. For Petitioners : Mr.S.Ravi For Respondents : Mr.Haja Nazirudeen, Special Government Pleader (T) O R D E R Original Application No.9750 of 1998 was filed before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench praying to quash the punishment of stoppage of increment for 2 years without cumulative effect passed by the second respondent in his Ref.A2/11291/94 dated 21.3.1996 and the consequential order of the first respondent in his Proc.No.Y2/64626/96 dated 16.9.1998 with all consequential monetary and service benefits. Since the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal was abolished, the O.A. was received by transfer and numbered as Writ Petition. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. The petitioner/applicant working as Assistant in the office of the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, was served with charge memo for tampering with entries and records. An enquiry officer was appointed. After a detailed enquiry, the enquiry officer held that all the charges were proved and the disciplinary authority imposed the punishment of stoppage of increment for two years without cumulative effect. An appeal was preferred to the first respondent and was rejected on merits. Hence, the O.A. has been filed challenging the delinquency charge. 3. The grounds raised in the O.A. is primarily on the factual aspect of the case which has been considered by the appropriate authority in the full-fledged enquiry and confirmed by the appellate authority. The procedures have been scrupulously followed by the authorities below. This Court finds no infirmity in the proceedings of the authorities below as also the punishment which is commensurate with the delinquency charge. Finding no infirmity in the impugned proceedings, this Court is of the view that there is no good reason to interfere with the proceedings or the punishment imposed. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar ts To 1. The Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Chepauk, Chennai-5. 2. The Deputy Commissioner (CT), Chennai (North) Division, Chennai-6. + 1 c.c. to The Special Government Pleader (Taxes). S.R.No.7366. W.P.No.33693 of 2006 GGK (CO) GSK 16.02.2010. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/