Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Mr.Justice R.Subramanian, Mr.Justice G.Arun Murugan, JJ
R.Manivasagan, S/o.D.Ramasami – Appellant
Versus
Registrar General, High Court of Madras – Respondent
ORDER :
G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.
This Writ Petition is filed challenging the order of the second respondent in G.O.(2D)No.8 Home (Courts-I) Department, dated 06.01.2023, whereby the punishment of 'dismissal from service' was imposed on the petitioner.
2. The petitioner was appointed as Civil Judge (Junior Division) in the Tamil Nadu State Judicial Service on 15.09.2015. While he was serving as Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Tiruchirappalli, he was issued with a charge memorandum dated 18.06.2021 under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules , 1955 [hereinafter referred to as “the Rules”] framing the following charge:-
“That you, Thiru.R.Manivasagan, after taking charge of the post of Judicial Magistrate, Additional Mahila Court, Tiruchirappalli on 06.05.2019, having taken cognizance of the directions of the Hon'ble Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai vide Order dated 06.03.2019 to dispose of Crl.M.P.No. 3376 of 2018 in D.V.C.No.107 of 2016 within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the copy of that Order as evidenced from your docket Order dated 13.05.2019, did not follow the directions given by the Hon'ble Madurai Bench
Judicial officers must maintain integrity and comply with court orders; serious misconduct justifies dismissal from service.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that disciplinary proceedings must comply with natural justice, be based on sufficient evidence, and impose proportionate punishment for proved mis....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that disciplinary proceedings must be based on some evidence, comply with natural justice, and ensure that the penalty is not disproportionate to t....
In disciplinary proceedings, the burden of proof lies with the charged officer to disprove allegations, and adherence to natural justice is essential for valid outcomes.
Disciplinary authorities must provide reasons for disagreeing with enquiry officer findings and issue a second show cause notice before imposing punishment, adhering to principles of natural justice.
(1) A Judicial Officer cannot pronounce concluding portion of his judgment in open court without entire text of judgment being prepared/dictated.(2) Requirement of a second show cause notice relating....
The principles of natural justice require that a delinquent employee be given a copy of the preliminary enquiry report before the disciplinary authority arrives at its conclusions with regard to the ....
Failure to pass final orders within the stipulated time can lead to the quashing of disciplinary proceedings and related punishment, as per the Division Bench decision.
Inordinate delay in disciplinary proceedings can lead to prejudice against the employee, violating principles of natural justice and warranting the setting aside of penalties.
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
