P.Ramesh, v. State of Tamil Nadu

JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.Subramaniam J.) The present writ appeal has been instituted challenging the writ order dated 19.07.2024 in W.P.No.19052 of 2024. Page2 of 4

¶2Appellant was working as an Assistant Commissioner in HR & CE Department. On account of allegation of corrupt practices, departmental disciplinary proceedings has been initiated. A criminal case was also registered and the appellant is the accused in the criminal case. Charge memorandum has been issued in the departmental disciplinary proceedings.

¶3Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that based on the confession statement given by the co-employee, petitioner was implicated both in the criminal case and in the disciplinary proceedings. Therefore, keeping the appellant under suspension is unnecessary.

¶4Admittedly, both the criminal case as well as departmental disciplinary proceedings are initiated against the appellant. Both proceedings can continue simultaneously and there is no bar. To convict a person under criminal law, strict proof of evidence is required. However, no such strict proof is required to punish a Government employee under the The Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline And Appeal) Rules. Procedures contemplated for criminal trial as well as departmental disciplinary proceedings are distinct and different. Thus, there is no bar to proceed with the departmental disciplinary proceedings during the pendency of the criminal case. Since charge memorandum has already been issued, there is no impediment for the disciplinary authority to continue the departmental disciplinary proceedings, conclude the same and pass appropriate final orders on merits and in Page3 of 4 accordance with law. Since, the allegations against the appellant are relating to corrupt practices and a criminal case is also pending against him, revocation of suspension is not desirable. Thus, respondents shall proceed with the departmental disciplinary proceedings independently based on the documents and evidences available on record by following the procedures, conclude the same and pass appropriate final orders as expeditiously as possible.

¶5With these observations, the writ appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions, if any, are closed. (S.M.S.,J.) (N.S.,J.) 02-06-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order GD To

1.State of Tamil Nadu Represented by its Secretary to Government, Tourism, Culture and Religious Endowments Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009.

¶2The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments Department, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034. WAoNo.o1063oofo2026 S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,eJ. AND N.SENTHILKUMAR,eJ. GD WAeNo.e1063eofe2026 02-06-2026 Page4oofo4

Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 02-06-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR P.Ramesh ..Appellant(s) Vs 1. State of Tamil Nadu Represented by its Secretary to Government, Tourism, Culture and Religious Endowments Department, Fort St.George, Chennai-600 009. 2. The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments Department, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 034. ..Respondent(s) Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent issuing writ of certiorarified mandamus to allow the above Writ Appeal by setting aside the Order dated 19.07.2024 passed in W.P.No.19052 of 2024. For Appellant(s): Mr.S.Saravana Kumar For Respondent(s): Mr.Veerabathiran, Government Counsel for HR & CE for R1 & R2