IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 26.08.2010 Coram: THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE K.B.K.VASUKI W.P.No.15943 of 2010 and M.P.No.2 of 2010 K.Thambidurai .. Petitioner vs. The Sub Collector, Tirupathur, Vellore District. .. Respondent Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records relating to the impugned order passed by the respondent in his proceedings No.Na.Ka.A- 1/10302/2005, dated 13.07.2010 and to quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service with all backwages and attendant benefits. For Petitioner : Mr. C.Prakasam For Respondent : M/s.D.Geetha Additional Government Pleader. ORDER On consent, this writ petition is taken up for final hearing. 2.The writ petition is filed against the order of the respondent in his proceedings No.Na.Ka.A-1/10302/2005, dated 13.07.2010 and to quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner in service with all backwages and attendant benefits. 3.The petitioner was working as Village Administrative Officer in Venkatasamuthiram, Ambur Taluk, Vellore District and he was placed under suspension on 04.08.2006 for certain irregularities but the order of suspension was subsequently revoked on 30.04.2007, but the same is followed by departmental enquiry and enquiry was conducted by the enquiry officer who submitted his enquiry report on 17.04.2007. On receipt of the enquiry report, the respondent herein https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ who is the disciplinary authority has passed the final order on 13.07.2010, thereby accepting the finding of the enquiry officer and the petitioner is imposed punishment of suspension for six months. The validity and the correctness of such order of the respondent is challenged in this writ petition. 4. Though the petitioner has raised various grounds questioning the correctness of the impugned order the main ground only seriously pressed into service is that the final order is passed without giving an opportunity to the petitioner and without issuing second show cause notice along with the copy of the report to enable the petitioner to have his pay against the finding of the enquiry officer. 5. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the final order dated 13.07.2010 does not refer to any second show cause notice, calling for the explanation of the petitioner, for the enquiry report. If that is so the impugned order is passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice and the procedure laid down under law which renders the same irregular and illegal. However, that by itself will not preclude the authority concerned to proceed further from the stage at which the same is found to be vitiated. 6. In the result, the impugned order dated 13.07.2010 is set aside and the respondent is directed to reinstate the petitioner in service with all backwages and attendant benefits with liberty given to the respondent to proceed further by issuing second show cause notice along with the copy of the enquiry report thereby calling for his explanation within the specified time and thereafter to pass final order, after considering the explanation, if any submitted by the petitioner and after giving him due opportunity of personally being heard, if warranted. 7. With this observation, the writ petition is allowed as prayed for. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. kkd Sd/- Asst. Registrar //True Copy// Sub Asst. Registrar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To The Sub Collector, Tirupathur, Vellore District. + 1 cc to Mr. C. Prakasam, Advocate SR No.63470 NSM(CO) SR/15.9.2010 W.P.No.15943 of 2010 and M.P.No.2 of 2010 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/