SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2014 Supreme(Mad) 3626

High Court of Judicature at Madras
R.S. RAMANATHAN, J.
Jayalakshmi
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu & Another
W.P.No.22311 of 2014 & M.P.No.1 of 2014
Decided On: 10-10-2014

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:S. Thamizharasi, Advocate.
For the Respondents:P. Rajalakshmi, Government Advocate.

The main legal point established is that departmental proceedings and criminal case can proceed simultaneously unless the charges are based on the same set of facts and evidence.

Headnote:

Legal Metrology Act - Violation of Legal Metrology Act 2009, Prevention of Corruption Act 1988 - Sec 15 (4) of Legal Metrology Act 2009, Sec 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Summary: The court discussed the violation of Sec 15(4) of Legal Metrology Act 2009 and the charges under Sec 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. It emphasized that the departmental proceedings and criminal case can proceed simultaneously unless the charges are based on the same set of facts and evidence.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, an Assistant Inspector of Labour, was served with a charge memo for violating the Legal Metrology Act 2009 and facing charges under the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the departmental proceedings and criminal case can proceed simultaneously unless the charges are based on the same set of facts and evidence.

Issues: The issues involved the petitioner's request to quash the charge memo and the contention that the departmental proceedings should be deferred until the conclusion of the criminal case.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the departmental proceedings and criminal case can proceed simultaneously unless the charges are based on the same set of facts and evidence.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the Writ Petition, stating that there was no merit in quashing the charge memo and that the departmental proceedings should not be stayed. No costs were awarded.

Judgment :

1. The petitioner is working as an Assistant Inspector of Labour Circle- II, Thanjavur. She was served with a charge memo issued by the second respondent on 11.06.2014 framing the following charges against her.

“Annexure-I

Statement of Charges framed against Tmt.J.Jayalakshmi, Assistant Inspector of Labour, Circle-II, Thanjavur (under suspension)

Charge

As per Sec 15 (4) of Legal Metrology Act 2009, every search and seizure made under this section shall be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. In this case, the Tmt.J.Jayalakshmi, Assistant Inspector of Labour, Thanjavur seized one Antonysamy's shop licence and seal plate of electronic scale during her Inspection on 29.6.2013 without issuing any seizure notice and she failed to note that in her Daily Diary and in Inspection Notes. Hence, she has violated Rule 20 of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1973.

20(1): Every member of the service shall at all times maintain absolute integrity and devotion to duty and shall do nothing which is unbecoming of a member of the service.

2. A criminal case has also been registered against the petitioner in Crime No.10/2013 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Thanjavur for offence under Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and after investigation, charge sheet was laid against the petitioner and the gravaman of the charge is as follows:-

:The complainant Antonysamy is living with his family at Sepanavary, IInd Street, Thanjavur Taluk and District. He is running an utencil shop in the name of Dntonysamy Paathirakadai at NRS Complex, Thanjavur South Alangam, Thanjavur and he has been using Electronic Scale in his shop since 2006 with labour licence. The licence and seal plate of Electronic Scale should be renewed every year. Accordingly, the complainant had renewed lastly on 18.6.2012. Hence, the next due date for renewal was 17.06.2013 and the renewal could be done upto 30.06.2013. In that circumstances, on 29.06.2013 at 11.30 hrs. Tmt. Jayalakshmi, Asst.Inspector of Labour, Thanjavur visited his shop with one Assistant (Stamp Smith) and enquired about Labours, Sunday leave and asked to handover the Shop licence (Certificate of verification) and Seal plate of Electronic Scale. As per the instruction of Tmt.Jayalakshmi, Asst.Inspector of Labour, Thanjavur, the complainant handed over above said licence (Certification of Verification) and Seal plate. The accused had not issued any seizure notice for taking the complainant's shop licence and seal plate of electronic scale machine and instructed the complainant to come to her office on 02.07.2013.

On 02.07.2013 when the complainant met the accused at her office, the accused told him to meet her on the next day. On 05.07.2013 at 14.30 hrs., when the complainant met the accused at her office, the accused Tmt.Jayalakshmi demanded bribe of Rs.2500/-for herself, as grafication other than legal remuneration, as a motive for renewal of licence and to put the renewal seal in the plate of electronic scale and instructed the complainant to bring the bribe money on 08.07.2013 after 3.00 p.m.,. Unwilling to pay the bribe money, the said Antonysamy reported the matter to the office of the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Thanjavur on 08.07.2013 at 09.00 hrs.,. The case was registered in Thanjavur V&AC Cr.No.10/2013 u/s 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 on 08.07.2013 at 11.00 and investigation was taken up. Trap was organised on 08.07.2013.

In pursuant of the earlier demand made on 05.07.2013 at 14.30 during the course of trap proceedings on 08.07.2013 between 15.10 hrs and 15.20 hrs when the complainant met the accused at O/o the Asst.Inspector of Labour, Circle II, Mangalapuram, Thanjavur, the accused Tmt.Jayalakshmi reiterated the earlier demand of Rs.2,500/-with the complainant Antonysamy in the presence of an independent official witness and accepted th





























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top