1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:07.01.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH W.A.(MD)No.25 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2011 A.Sankaralingam ...Appellant Vs. The Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records, District Land Survey Office, Tiruchirapalli. ...Respondent Prayer: The Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letter Patent, against the order dated 18.11.2010 in W.P.(MD)No.4484 of 2010 of this Court. PRAYER IN WP[MD]NO.4484/2010: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the order dated 12.05.2005 in Rc.No.A7/6171/2005 and consequential order dated 03.09.2009 of the respondent herein and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent herein to reinstate the petitioner as Town Surveyor, Taluk Office, Manapparai Taluk Office, Tiruchirapalli District with effect from 12.05.2005 with all attendant benefits. For Appellant : Mrs.D.Geetha For Respondent : Mr.R.Janakiramulu, Spl.G.P. JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR,J.) This Writ Appeal is directed against the order dated 18.11.2010 made in W.P.(MD).No4484 of 2010, wherein a learned Single Judge of this Court dismissed the Writ Petition and upheld the order of suspension passed against the appellant, suspending him from the services of Taluk Office, Manapparai Taluk Office, Tiruchirapalli. 2.The case of the appellant before the learned Single Judge was that the appellant, who was employed as a Sub Inspector of Survey in the Taluk Office in Manaparai, Trichy District, was placed under suspension by the respondent on 12.05.2005 on the ground of demanding and accepting bribe and a criminal case was registered against him. The appellant has not disclosed how much amount he has demanded and accepted. The said order of suspension was passed under Rule 17(e)(i)(2) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. The appellant earlier filed W.P.(MD).No.2661 of 2007 and prayed to quash the proceedings dated 12.05.2005 and to direct the respondent to restore him as Town Sub Inspector of Survey in Taluk Office, Manapparai, Trichy District with effect from 10.05.2006 with all attendant benefits. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3.The said Writ Petition was disposed of by giving direction to the respondent to consider the representation of the appellant dated 17.02.2007 and pass appropriate orders within a period of four weeks. The respondent, by order dated 09.08.2007, rejected the request of the appellant seeking reinstatement in service and stated that consequent on trap by the Vigilance and Anti Corruption, he was placed under suspension and due to the pendency of a criminal case in Crime No.6 of 2005, the order of suspension cannot be revoked. In the criminal case registered, charge sheet was filed against the appellant and the said criminal case is pending in C.C.No.10 of 2006, on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate cum Special Court, Tiruchirapalli. 4.Again the appellant filed W.P.(MD).No.4484 of 2010 to reinstate him as Town Surveyor, Taluk Office, Manapparai Taluk Office, Tiruchirappalli District. This Court, by order dated 18.11.2010, dismissed the said Writ Petition. 5.Aggrieved over the said order dated 18.11.2010, the appellant filed this Writ appeal and prayed to set aside the order dated 18.11.2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(MD)No.4484 of 2010. 6.The order of the respondent reads as follows:- "Proceedings of the Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records, Trichirappalli Present: Thiru T.R.Nagarajan Rc.A7/6171/2005 dated 12.05.2005 Sub: Public Survey – Survey and Land Records Department Tiruchirappalli District – Sangaralingam (Thiru) A - Town Surveyor – Manapparai - Suspension orders – issued. Ref: Message received from Deputy Superintendent of Police, L&AC, Tiruchirappalli, dated 10.05.2005 Cr.No.6 of 2005. ------ ORDER I whereas complaint against Thiru.A.Sangaralingam, Town Sub Inspector of Survey, Taluk Office, Manapparai, Tiruchy District of a circular office is under investigation. And whereas in the circumstances of the cost it is necessary in the public interest to place the said Thiru.A.Sangaralingam, Town Sub Inspector of Survey, Manapparai under suspension from service. Now therefore under Sub Rules (e)(i)(ii) of Rule 17 of the Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules the said Thiru A.Sangaralingam in with effect from 10.05.2005. Placed under suspension from service until further orders. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 2.During the period of suspension then said Thiru.A.Sangaralingam, Town Sub Inspector of Survey, Taluk Office, Manaparai will be paid subsistence allowance and dearness allowance and admissible under fundamental rules 53 (1). He will addition be paid the usual compensatory allowance. 3.The Head quarters of the said Thiru.A.Sangaralingam Town Sub Inspector of Survey, Taluk Office, Manapparai during the period of suspension shall be Mnapparai. He shall not leave the Heard quarters without obtaining the prior permission of the authority concerned. Assistant Director of (i/c) Survey and Land Records, Trichirappalli. To Thiru.A.Sangaralingam,Town Surveyor, Taluk Office, Manapparai." 7.In the said Writ Petition, an interim stay was granted. As the criminal case is pending against the appellant and a serious corruption charge is levelled against him, for demanding and accepting bribe, the request of the appellant seeking reinstatement in service was negatived by the respondent, as there is no change in circumstance. 8.The contention raised in the Writ Appeal is that the suspension order having been issued on 12.05.2005, the same is bound to be set aside, since the trial in C.C.No.10 of 2006 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruchirapalli in respect of the criminal case pending against the appellant is not disposed of and the prolonged suspension is bad in law. 9.We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant. 10.For proper appreciation, it is desirable to extract Rule 17(e) (i)(2) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, which read as follows:- "17(e)(i)(2):a complaint against him of any criminal offence is under investigation or trial and if such suspension is necessary in the public interest." 11.It is an admitted case that the appellant, who is a Sub Inspector of Survey, employed in Taluk Office in Manaparai, Tiruchy District, has involved in a Vigilance and Anti Corruption case and charge sheet is pending under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, before the competent Criminal Court and the case is under trial in C.C.No.10 of 2006 on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruchirapalli. A person, who is facing criminal charge, can be placed under suspension or not, is no longer res integra. In a given case, the department can review the order of suspension on the facts and circumstances of the case and bearing in mind the public interest. An employee cannot demand revocation of suspension as a matter of right. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4 12.In W.A.No.1114 of 2007, dated 05.11.2007, a Division Bench of this Court [SJMJ as he then was and NPVJ], in the case of the Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu and others vs. N.Shanmugasundaram, set aside the order of a learned Single Judge quashing an order of suspension and allowed the Writ Appeal and upheld the order of suspension on similar ground. A Division Bench of this Court [NPVJ and NKKJ] in the case of M.Rajammal v. Principal District Judge reported in 2009 (4) MLJ 212 held that Rule 17(e) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, contemplates that a member of a service may be placed under suspension from service, where an enquiry into grave charges against him is contemplated, or is pending or a complaint against him or any criminal offence is under investigation or trial and if such suspension is necessary in the public interest. In the said Judgment, the decisions of the Supreme Court in Hotel Imperial v. Hotel Workers' Union reported in AIR 1959 SC 1342 : 1959 II LLJ 544 and in R.P.Kapur v. Union of India reported in AIR 1964 SC 787 : 1966 II LLJ 164 were followed and upheld the similar order of suspension. In W.A.No.1818 of 2009, dated 15.12.2009, a Division Bench of this Court [ RBIJ and NPVJ], in the case of S.Jeevanantham vs. the Government of Tamil Nadu and others considered an identical issue and confirmed the order of a learned Single Judge dismissing the Writ Petition, which was filed challenging the order of suspension. Suspension orders were also upheld in the case of D.Gnanasekaran v. Chief Educational Officer reported in 2007 (1) MLJ 457 and in the case of S.Jeyasingh Rajan v. President, Kalloorani Panchayat reported in 2006 (4) MLJ 59. The Supreme Court in the case of Allahabad Bank and another vs. Deepak Kumar Bhola reported in 1997 (4) SCC 1, upheld the order of suspension of a bank employee, who was facing a criminal offence involving moral turpitude. In the said Judgment, the order of the High Court, Allahabad, quashing the order of suspension was set aside and the appeal filed by the bank was allowed. 13.The Supreme Court in the decision in Surain Singh v. State of Punjab reported in 2009 (1) Supreme 458 held that corruption in the administration has hampered the development of the Nation and the persons, who involved in the corruption cases, should be dealt with firmly and the persons indulging in corruption practices cannot be allowed to be in public employment, to maintain purity of administration, as such attitude will definitely affect public interest. In Paragraph No.7, it is held thus:- "7. Day in and day out the gigantic problem of corruption in the public servants is on the increase. Large scale corruption retards the nation-building activities and everyone has to suffer on that count. Corruption is corroding like cancerous lymph nodes, the vital veins of the body politics, social fabric of efficiency in the public service and moralizing the honest officers. The efficiency in public service would improve only when the public servant devotes his sincere attention and does the duty diligently, truthfully, honestly and devotes himself assiduously to the performance of the duties of his post. [See: Swatantar Singh v. State of Haryana 1997 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5 (4) SCC 14 and State of M.P v. Shambhu Dayal Nagar 2002 (1) SCC 1." 14.In the light of the above categorical pronouncements of this Court as well as the Supreme Court and having regard to the undisputed fact that the appellant is involved in criminal case, that too, in a bribe case, he has no right to seek revocation of the suspension order, merely because the criminal trial is pending for three years. 15.Hence, we are of the firm view that the learned Single Judge has rightly declined to interfere with the order of suspension passed against the appellant, who indulged in corrupt practices and who is facing criminal trial in C.C.No.10 of 2006 under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. 16.We are conscious of the fact that the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India has already given administrative instructions to all the High Courts to ensure that cases in respect of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, be fast tracked and taken up for hearing on priority basis both at the High Court and in District levels. Since the appellant is facing criminal case and charge sheet was also filed under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, as stated supra and having regard to the direction issued by the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India, as aforesaid, we direct the Special Judge for Corruption Cases cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruchirappalli, to complete the trial in C.C.No.10 of 2006 and dispose of the same before the end of June 2011 and send a report regarding disposal of the said criminal case to the Registry of this Court before 8th July 2011. 17.In the result, the order dated 18.11.2010 made in W.P.(MD). No.4484 of 2010 is confirmed and the Writ Appeal is dismissed in limine. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. nbj Sd/- Assistant Registrar[CO] /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Assistant Director of Survey and Land Records, District Land Survey Office, Tiruchirapalli. 2.The Special Judge for Corruption cases cum Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tiruchirapalli. +1 cc to mr.AL.Ganthimathi, Advocate SR.No.1089. +1 cc to Special Government Pleader, SR.No.994. W.A.(MD)No.25 of 2011 Dated:07.01.2011 5P/5C RPB 24.01.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/