V.Jayachandran v. The Management of State

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 15.06.2023 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY and W.M.P(MD)Nos. 3606 & 3607 of 2016 V.Jayachandran ... Petitioner in both the Petitions

Vs.

1.The Management of State Express Transport Corporation, (Tamil Nadu) Limited, Represented by its Managing Director, Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 2.

¶2The General Manager, State Express Transport Corporation, (Tamil Nadu) Limited, Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 2. ... Respondents in both the Petitions COMMON PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order imposed by the 2nd Respondent in Aa.No. 044729/DL2/AVPoKa/2013, dated 25.03.2014 and 14099/DL2/AVPoKa/2013, dated 23.04.2014, respectively; quash the same. In both Writ Petitions For Petitioner : Mr.R.Venkatesan For Respondents : Mr.K.Sathiya Singh Standing Counsel

COMMON ORDER W.P(MD)No.2194 of 2016 has been filed for Writ of Certiorari challenging the impugned order, dated 25.03.2014. W.P(MD)No.2195 of 2016 has been filed for Writ of Certiorari challenging the Show cause notice, dated 23.04.2014.

¶2Since the issue involved in these Writ Petitions are similar in nature both the writ petitions are taken up together and disposed of by a common order.

¶3The respondents have initiated a disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner for certain allegations. A charge memo was also issued to the petitioner alleging that he insulted the Branch Manager at Koyambedu in front of other workers. The 2nd respondent without conducting any enquiry, straightaway passed the impugned order and has imposed punishment of stoppage of increment for six months without cumulative effect.

¶4It is seen from the records that the petitioner has attained superannuation and retired from service on 30.04.2014. Since the petitioner was on the verge of retirement, the impugned order has became unimplementable order. If it is unimplementable order, the respondents have no rights to recover the same from the petitioner. Therefore, this Court is inclined to allow this Writ Petition.

¶5Accordingly, W.P(MD)No.2194 of 2016 is allowed. The respondents had not paid terminal benefits to the petitioner. The same shall be paid, within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

¶6W.P(MD)No.2195 of 2016 has been filed challenging the Show cause notice, dated 23.04.2014 and the said Show cause notice was issued seeking explanation from the petitioner. Since W.P(MD)No.2194 of 2016 is allowed, the said show cause notice, dated 23.04.2014 is also hereby quashed. Accordingly, W.P(MD)No.2195 of 2016 is allowed.

¶7Finally, these Writ Petitions are allowed. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Index : Yes / No

15.06.2023 Internet : Yes

ksa To

1.The Management of State Express Transport Corporation, (Tamil Nadu) Limited, Represented by its Managing Director, Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 2.

¶2The General Manager, State Express Transport Corporation, (Tamil Nadu) Limited, Pallavan Salai, Chennai – 2. S.SRIMATHY, J ksa Common Order made in

15.06.2023