IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
Murugesh Reddy Krishnagiri – Appellant
Versus
The District Collector, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri & Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 5358 of 2022 & W.M.P. No. 5452 of 2022
Decided On : 10-08-2023
Suspension - Village Panchayat Secretary - The court upheld the authority of the Block Development Officer to suspend the Village Panchayat Secretary, citing the relevant provisions in the Tamil Nadu Village Panchayat Secretaries (Conditions of Service) Rule, 2013. However, the court directed the disciplinary authority to review the suspension and complete the disciplinary proceeding within a specified timeframe.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a Panchayat Secretary, challenged the order of suspension by the 2nd respondent, contending that the 2nd respondent had no authority to suspend the petitioner.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Block Development Officer had the power to suspend the petitioner under Rule 15 of the Tamil Nadu Village Panchayat Secretaries (Conditions of Service) Rule, 2013. The court directed the disciplinary authority to review the suspension and complete the disciplinary proceeding within a specified timeframe.
Issues: The main issue was the authority of the 2nd respondent to suspend the petitioner from the Secretaryship of Nakondapalli Panchayat.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Block Development Officer had the power to suspend the Village Panchayat Secretary under Rule 15 of the Tamil Nadu Village Panchayat Secretaries (Conditions of Service) Rule, 2013. The court also directed the disciplinary authority to review the suspension and complete the disciplinary proceeding within a specified timeframe.
Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of with the direction for the disciplinary authority to review the suspension and complete the disciplinary proceeding within a specified timeframe.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings dated 19.01.2022 passed in Na.Ka.No.152/2022/E2 on the file of the 2nd respondent herein and to quash the same.)
1. Challenging the order of the 2nd respondent dated 19.01.2022 in Na.Ka.No.152/2022/E2 suspending the petitioner from the Secretaryship of Nakondapalli Panchayat, the suspended Secretary of the panchayat has come forward with the present writ petition.
2. The petitioner was the Panchayat Secretary of Nakondapalli Panchayat in Hosur Taluk and Krishnagiri District. He was placed under suspension for certain irregularities and misappropriation of funds. The order of suspension is challenged mainly on the ground that the 2nd respondent has no authority to suspend the petitioner and such an order could be passed only by the appointing authority viz., the Personal Assistant (Development) to the Collector. It is therefore the contention of the petitioner that the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent without jurisdiction is not sustainable in law.
3. The 2nd respondent filed counter affidavit denying the averments in the writ petition and inter alia contending that the petitioner fabricated a deed of cancellation of gift deed executed in favour of the 2nd respondent by forging the signature of the 2nd respondent and presented the same before the Sub Registrar concerned for registration.
4. Heard both sides and also perused the records carefully.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has taken the court through the relevant provisions in the Tamil Nadu Village Panchayat Secretaries (Conditions of Service) Rule, 2013 for short “the Rules”. [Published vide Notification No.G.O.Ms.NO.72, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (E5), 9th July 2013 – No.SRO A-20/2013].
6. Rule 3 speaks of appointment to the service. Rule 4 states that the appointing authority for the post shall be the Personal Assistant (Development) to the Collector. Rule 10 deals with administrative control which sets out that every person appointed to the post shall be under the control of the Executive Authority of the Village Panchayat concerned. The Block Development Officer (Village Panchayats) shall exercise overall administrative control in respect of the post at the Panchayat Union level.
7. Rule 15 sets out authority competent to impose the penalties which reads as under: “15. Authority competent to impose the penalties.- The authority competent to impose any of the above penalties shall be the Personal Assistant (Development) to the Collector. However, the Block Development Officer (Village Panchayats) may initiate disciplinary action on the Village Panchayat Secretary and remit the papers to Personal Assistant (Development) to the Collector for passing final orders.”
8. Rule 17 deals with suspension which reads as under:-
“17. Suspension.- (1) The appointing authority may place a person holding the post under suspension, if it is necessary in public interest, where, -
(i) an inquiry into grave charges against him/her is contemplated or is pending; or
(ii) a complaint against him/her of any criminal offence is under investigation or trial.
(2) A person holding the post who is detained in custody whether on a criminal charge or otherwise, for a period longer than 48 hours shall be deemed to have been suspended under this rule.
(3) A review on extension of suspension of the persons holding the post shall be done by the Personal Assistant (Development) to Collector for every quarter.
(4) During the period of suspension, a person holding the post is eligible for subsistence allowance of 505 of the last pay and allowances drawn.”
9. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that since there is a separate rule governing the suspension of the Village
The main legal point established is the authority of the Block Development Officer to suspend the Village Panchayat Secretary under Rule 15 of the Tamil Nadu Village Panchayat Secretaries (Conditions....
The Collector lacks authority to suspend a Panchayat Executive Officer, highlighting the independence of Gram Panchayats and mandating adherence to principles of natural justice in disciplinary actio....
Suspension orders must adhere to procedural requirements and be reviewed within 90 days; authority for disciplinary actions against Panchayat Executive Officers rests with local Gram Panchayats, not ....
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.