Back
M. S. RAMESH
A. Renkapa (deceased) – Appellant
Versus
Secretary to Government, Municipal Administration & Water Supply Department, Secretariat, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order of the first respondent issued in G.O. (D) No.224 MAWS Department dated 26.04.2013 and to quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents to release the DCRG amount of Rs.2,69,825/-, within a reasonable period as fixed by this Court.)
For an incident that occurred in the year 1993/1994 at Erode Municipality, while the petitioner was serving as a Junior Engineer, a charge memo dated 19.08.2002 was issued, alleging certain irregularities and misappropriation, causing loss to the Government. Not being satisfied with the petitioner's explanation to the charges, an inquiry was conducted, whereby the charges were held to be proved through an inquiry report dated 16.07.2004. The inquiry report was communicated to the petitioner on 29.09.2006. Though the petitioner had submitted his further explanation on 23.11.2006 itself, no final decision was taken, which prompted him to file Writ Petition in W.P.Nos.4520 and 4521 of 2010, whereby this Court, by an order dated 09.04.2010, directed the Discip
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to avoid inordinate delays in disciplinary proceedings, the serious prejudice and mental distress caused by such delays, and the court's a....
Excessive delay in disciplinary proceedings, attributable to the inaction of the State, can lead to the quashing of the proceedings, especially when the delay violates the petitioner's right to a spe....
Inordinate delay in disciplinary proceedings post-superannuation causes prejudice, warranting quashing of charges.
Delay in initiating the departmental proceedings and splitting up of delinquencies into separate charge memos are fatal and illegal, respectively.
Timely initiation and conclusion of disciplinary proceedings are critical; excessive delays can vitiate the proceedings and infringe on the rights of the employee.
Inordinate delay in initiating disciplinary proceedings and absence of witnesses in the charge memo vitiates the proceedings and causes serious prejudice to the delinquent, rendering consequential pr....
Inordinate delay in initiating disciplinary proceedings can cause prejudice to the accused and may lead to the quashing of charges. G.O.338 prohibits the continuation of disciplinary proceedings agai....
Inordinate delay in initiating departmental proceedings prejudices the charged officer unless there is a proper explanation for the delay.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
