VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

Arumugam v. The Managing Director

DISMISSED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
10 June 2026
Bench
Mummineni Sudheer Kumarauthor
Case no.
WP(MD) 15507/2026

Judgment

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 10/06/2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR WP(MD). Nos.15507 and 15525 of 2026 and WMP(MD)Nos.11603,11620 and 11621 of 2026 In WP(MD)No.15507 of 2026: Arumugam ... Petitioner Vs Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd., 4th Floor,C.M.D.A. Tower-2, Egmore,Chennai-600 008. Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd., Tiruchirappali District.

¶3The District Manager/Deputy Collector, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd., ... Respondents PRAYER :- Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records in Na.Ka.No.A-1/8152/2026 dated 17.05.2026 on the file of the 3rd respondent and quash the same so far as the petitioner concerned, consequently direct the third respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service with continuity of service and all service and monetary benefits within the time frame fixed by this Court. In WP(MD). No.15525 of 2026: Manoharan ... Petitioner Vs. Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited, 4th Floor,C.M.D.A.Tower - 2, Egmore,Chennai - 600 008.. Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited, Tiruchirappalli District.

¶3The District Manager/DeputY Collector, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Limited, ... Respondents PRAYER :- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records in Na.Ka. No.A-1/8152/2026 dated 17.05.2026 on the file of the 3rd respondent and quash the same so far as the petitioner concerned, consequently direct the third respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service with continuity of service and all service and monetary benefits within the time frame fixed by this Court. In both petitions: For Petitioner : Mr.A.P.Muthupandian

For Respondent : MR.H.Arumugam C O M M O N O R D E R

The writ petitions have been filed challenging the very same proceedings whereby the petitioners herein and another person were placed under suspension on the ground that they have been selling liquor in the TASMAC shop at a price higher than the price fixed. An enquiry is initiated on the said allegation and the same is pending. It is not the case of the petitioners that the first respondent is not competent to pass the order of suspension.

¶2In the absence of any such allegation on the competence of the authority, who imposed the punishment and in the absence of any malafide attributed for placing the petitioners under suspension, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned orders for the present.

¶3Accordingly, both the writ petitions are dismissed. However, the petitioners are granted liberty to submit representations before the first respondent seeking for re-instatement and in case if any such representations are submitted, the first respondent shall consider the same in accordance with law. In case, if suspension is continued indefinitely, the petitioners are granted liberty to approach this Court again. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

10.06.2026 CM TO Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd., 4th Floor,C.M.D.A. Tower-2, Egmore,Chennai-600 008. Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd., Tiruchirappali District.

¶3The District Manager/Deputy Collector, Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd., MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR,J CM WP(MD). Nos.15507 and 15525 of 2026 and WMP(MD)Nos.11603,11620 and 11621 of 2026 Date : 10/06/2026

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.