IMPORTANT POINT
The court found charge Nos.1, 3, 5 and 7 proved against the writ petitioner, a Section Officer, which were grave in nature and touching upon his integrity. The court held that the punishment of dismissal from service was not disproportionate to the gravity of the proved charges.

JUDGMENT :

S.M. Subramaniam, J.

(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by the respondent in his proceedings in Roc.No.10/2022-Con-Estt-II dated 05.08.2022 confirming the order of dismissal passed by him in his proceeding in Roc.No.10/2022/Con-Estt.II, dated 13.04.2022 and quash the same as is against all canons of law and consequently directing the respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service in the post of CO/SO/AE, High Court, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai and pay all the attendant service and monetary benefits.)

1. FACTS IN BRIEF:

The writ petitioner was appointed as Copyist on 25.07.1996. Thereafter, he was promoted as Assistant on 15.06.1998 and as Assistant Section Officer on 06.01.2000. Finally, he was promoted as Section Officer on 23.07.2009.

2. The High Court Registrar (Vigilance) received a letter dated 05.08.2011 from Mr.S.Doraisamy, Advocate, wherein a compact disk was enclosed. Request is made for certain information under the Right to Information Act with regard to the identification of voices in the compact disk, which contained the alleged telephonic conversation among three persons, viz., Mr.Jayendra Saraswathi Sankaracharya, Kanchi Mutt, Mr.T.Ramasamy, then then Sessions Judge, Puducherry and Ms.B.Gowri Kamatchi related to Mr.Jayendra Saraswathi Sankaracharya. Subsequently on 18.08.2011, a complaint has been received from Mr.P.Sundarrajan, Advocate addressed to the Registrar (Vigilance), requesting to register a case and to probe the tapes circulated with regard to the telephone conversation purported to be made between viz., Mr.Jayendra Saraswathi Sankaracharya, who was arrayed as the prime accused in Sankar Raman murder case in SC No.94 of 2005 on the file of the Sessions Court at Puducherry, Mr.T.Ramasamy, the then Sessions Judge, Puducherry, devottee and another person, discussing the monetary payments and promised payments.

3. The requisition letter and the complaint, were placed before the Hon'ble Administrative Committee. In the meeting held on 24.08.2022, Mr.K.Authinathan, formerly Administrator General and Official Trustee, was appointed as Preliminary Enquiry Officer to enquire into the complaint. The enquiry report was submitted on 19.09.2011. The enquiry report contained the Expert's opinion of Deputy Director of Forensic Sciences Department dated 15.09.2011.

4. The Expert has opined that contextual discontinuity and abrupt ending of the conversation found in the audio files forwarded for examination indicate the possibility of editing of the source audio files. The Expert has further opined that the content of the audio can be authenticated only after examining the actual recording devices (carrying the source audio files), which were used to record the original conversation. The Expert has further stated that the complainant had not cooperated with the enquiry and concluded that the materials gathered during the enquiry do not contain even the materials relating the facts in issue which merit any further action.

5. In the meantime, Mr.P.Sundarrajan, Advocate filed WP No.19894 of 2011 before the High Court of Madras on 22.08.2011 praying for Writ of Mandamus, directing the Registrar (Vigilance), High Court of Madras to commence statutory investigation by registering the FIR on his complaint dated 18.08.2011 and to submit a preliminary report about the alleged bribe tapes and financial transactions discussed in the tapes and if the report confirms payment of bribes paid to the Trial Court Judge by the accused, then to order for re-trial of SC No.94 of 2005 on the file of the Sessions Court, Puducherry by any other Judge in Puducherry.

6. The Hon'ble Administrative Committee in the meeting held on 14.10.2011, directed the Reg