Initiation of disciplinary action against Secretary of Company.

Thangamani, J.

The writ petitioner claims that in 1978 he passed the final examination conducted by the Institute of Company Secretaries of India, New Delhi. As per the rules and regulations of the Institute, a candidate who has passed the final examination should undergo training for a specified period in a company recognised by the Institute for such purpose, and with the Registrar of Companies for 15 days before registering such candidate as a member of the Institute. In his case the Institute has exempted him from undergoing the said training since for seven years he had already worked as Manager (Accounts) in the National Textile Corporation (AP KK & M) Limited. While he was working in the National Textile Corporation (AP KK & M) Limited, the first respondent Tamil Nadu Magnesite Limited, Salem called for applications for appointment of the Financial Controller-cum-Secretary in the said Company and he applied for the Same setting forth all his qualifications. In his application dated 8. 1979 he has only mentioned that he has passed the final examination of the Institute of Companies Secretaries of India in 1978, as he has not been registered as a member then. He was selected and on the receipt of the appointment order he assumed charge on 5. 1980. Since initially the Institute did not give him total exemption from the rule regarding training, the Board of Directors of the first respondent Company in their resolution dated 112. 1981 redesignated his post as that of Acting Secretary-cum-Financial Controller. They also resolved that after becoming a member of the Institute the designation as Financial Controller-cum-Secretary could be restored. Later on, on 14. 1982 he was admitted as a member of the Institute by giving him total exemption from undergoing the requisite training. Thereupon the Board of Directors redesignated his post as stated above from 24. 1992. The statutory authority was also duly informed about his redesignation.

2. In the meanwhile, in 1980 he was appointed as the financial Controller of Tamil Nadu Magnesite Products Limited on an honorarium of Rs.250 per month.

3. On 5. 1985 the second respondent Thiru V.Madhavan Nair, I.A.S. became the Managing Director of the first respondent Company. On 112. 1985 he wanted the petitioner to furnish materials to substantiate a corruption charge against S.Subramaniam, a prior Managing Director of the Company. The petitioner refused to oblige the second respondent by giving a false statement against the prior Managing Director to the Officers of the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti Corruption. So on the same evening the Personal Assistant of the second respondent served on the petitioner the Office Order No.15 dated 112. 1985 placing him under suspension from whatever post he was holding in Tamil Nadu Magnesite Limited and Tamil Nadu Magnesite Products Limited with effect from that afternoon.

4. After placing him under suspension, the second respondent served the show cause notice-cum-charge sheet by letter No. 1(2)/6510/85-86 dated 11. 1986. Of the four charges framed against him the first was that he had released security deposits of certain contractors without obtaining proper Government Security equivalent to the amount released by him at the instance of two contractors. Charge Nos.2 and 3 read as if he is an employee of Tamil Nadu Magnesite Products Limited which he is not. The fourth charge is that he had deliberately offered his candidature for the post of Company Secretary in the first respondent-company suppressing the fact that he was not an Associate Member of the Institute of Company Secretaries of India and he had failed to inform the management about his non-qualification even after his appointment till the Company received the copy of the letter from the Institute intimating his admission as an Associate Member.

5. On 21. 1986 he submitted his explanation to the charges levelled against him. However, the second respondent ordered enquiry i