P.JYOTHIMANI
C. Logeswaran – Appellant
Versus
Special Officer – Respondent
1. The writ petition is directed against the charge memo of the respondent dated 25.6.2004, on the basis that the respondent has no power to continue the disciplinary proceedings since the petitioner was relieved from service with effect from 30.6.2004 on attainment of the age of superannuation.
2.1. The petitioner was employed as a Secretary of the respondent/ Society, which is a co-operative society, and he was to retire from service on attainment of the age of superannuation on 30.6.2004. It was five days before the date of superannuation the impugned charge memo came to be issued on 25.6.2004, on the basis that he was involved in the issuance of loans in an improper manner to power loom weavers and failed to recover the loans. It was also charged that the petitioner has failed to shift the society to the new building, for which sanction was given in the year 2001.
2.2. It is the case of the petitioner that the charge memo is motivated and according to him, on 30.6.2004, the petitioner was relieved from service on attaining the age of superannuation without prejudice to the disciplinary proceedings pending against him. The terminal benefits of the petitioner have been
1. K.Marappan v. The Deputy Registrar of Co-operative Societies, Namakkal
3. Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi
5. Pradeep Kumar Biswas v. Indian Institute of Chemical Biology and Ors.
6. Bhagirathijena v. Board of Directors, O.S.F.C. & Others
7. M.K.S.Balasubramanian v. The Kancheepuram Central Co-operative Bank Limited
9. U.P. State Sugar Co-operation Limited and others v. Kamal Swaroop Tondon
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.