Back
2007 Supreme(Mad) 4260
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. DHANAPALAN
Aziz Ahmed
Versus
The Government of Tamil Nadu
W.P.No.28837 of 2005
Decided On : 19-12-2007
For the Petitioner:M.Muthappan, Advocate. For the Respondent:A.Edwin Prabakar, Advocate.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that government officers must adhere to the Model Code of Conduct and safeguard the interest of the Government in their official duties.
Headnote:
Suspension - Service Benefits - Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules - Summary
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a government officer, challenged the suspension order and subsequent disciplinary proceedings against him. He was accused of issuing orders leasing minerals during the General Election process, violating the Model Code of Conduct. The petitioner denied the charges and argued that the orders were issued in accordance with the Secretariat Office Manual. The petitioner was ultimately imposed a penalty of 50% cut in pension for 36 months.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner had issued orders leasing minerals during the General Election process, violating the Model Code of Conduct. The court also found that the petitioner had put up a misleading circulation note and recommended the renewal of a lease, causing undue pecuniary gain. The court held that the petitioner failed to safeguard the interest of the Government.
Issues: The issues included whether the petitioner's actions violated the Model Code of Conduct and whether the punishment imposed was shockingly disproportionate.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioner's actions violated the Model Code of Conduct and failed to safeguard the interest of the Government. The court also found that the punishment imposed was not shockingly disproportionate.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the penalty of 50% cut in the petitioner's pension for 36 months.
Challenging the impugned order of the respondent dated 04.07.2005, the petitioner has filed this writ petition for a direction to the respondent to pay him all the service benefits including the monetary benefits.
2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are, as under:
(a) The petitioner was appointed as a Junior Assistant in the Secretariat in the Agricultural Department in the year 1964. Later, he was promoted to higher posts, namely, Assistant Section Officer, Section Officer and Under Secretary in various departments of Secretariat. After completion of District Training successfully for a period of one year in Madurai District, the petitioner joined as Under Secretary (Mining) in the Industries Department, Secretariat on 01.02.1994. Later on, he was promoted as Deputy Secretary to Government and posted in the Industries Department in December 1995.
(b) While the petitioner was due to retire on 30.06.1996 on reaching the age of superannuation, to his shock and surprise, he was served with an order of suspension dated 18.06.1996 on the ground that an enquiry into grave charges was contemplated against him.
(c) According to the petitioner, he has rendered an unblemished service of nearly 32 years in various departments in the Secretariat and there is absolutely nothing against him which warranted disciplinary action so as to enable the Government to suspend him under the Rules. In O.A.No.4087 of 1996 filed by the petitioner, the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, by its order dated 24.04.1997 has set aside the order of suspension on the ground that the said order issued by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.614 Public (Special A) Department, dated 18.06.1996 cannot survive any further after 30.06.1996 and shall stand revoked. Pending the Original Application, the Government had framed a charge memo against the petitioner and appointed an Inquiring Officer to enquire into the alleged charges against him. But, consequent to the order of the Tribunal, dated 24.04.1997, the said charge memo became infructuous.
(d) Pursuant to the orders of the Tribunal dated 24.04.1997, the Government in Public Department, by its order dated 111. 1997 revoked the impugned order of suspension, dated 18.06.1996 and allowed the petitioner to retire from service on superannuation on the afternoon of 30.06.1996 without imposing any condition whatsoever. Again to the shock and surprise of the petitioner, the Government issued two charge memos, as per
(i) Letter No.3142/96-18 Public (Special-A) Department dated 111. 1997 and (ii) Letter No.889/97-1, Public (Special-A) Department dated 211. 1997. The charges as detailed in the charge memos are as under:
"Letter No.3142/96-18 Public (Special-A) Department dt.111. 1997:
Charge 1: That you, Thiru Aziz Ahmed, while functioning as Deputy Secretary to Government, during the period 212. 1996 to 18.06.1996, had caused the issue of orders leasing minor and major minerals in 35 cases dating from 21.03.1996 to 10.04.1996, during the period when the General Election 1996 process was on. You, being a Deputy Secretary to Government should have been well aware of the Model Code of Conduct and that no public interest was served by issuing those orders to benefit certain individuals with undue pecuniary gain. You should have waited till the election process was over. You did not even consider it necessary to submit the files relating to the above matters to the then Principal Secretary to Government, Industries Department before issue of orders, though all the Government orders were issued in the name of the Principal Secretary to Government.
Charge 2: That you, Thiru Aziz Ahmed, as Deputy Secretary to Government in charge of the subject mining during the aforesaid period had issued orders in 23 cases after recording in the files that the orders be issued immediately as desired by the (then) Minister for Industries. You should have obtained clear written orders from the Secretary concerned as to w
