Back
2025 Supreme(Mad) 2800
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.SUBRAMANIAN, G.ARUL MURUGAN, JJ.
K.Anbazhagan S/o.Kuppusamy - Appellant
Vs.
The Registrar General, Madras High Court - Respondent
W.P.No.3205 of 2025 and W.M.P.No.3550 of 2025
Decided On : 28-03-2025
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr.N.U.Pressanna
For the Respondents: Mr.J.Chandran Sundar Sashi Kumar Standing Counsel
Disciplinary action must balance accountability for misconduct with consideration of long service and potential impact on retirement benefits.
Headnote:
(A) Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1955 - Rule 17(b) and Rule 8(iv) - Disciplinary action against a judicial officer for failure to serve summons properly - The petitioner, after 41 years of service, was found to have made a false endorsement regarding a party's death, leading to a punishment of reduction in pay - The disciplinary authority imposed punishment due to the serious nature of the lapse, but the court modified it to a reduction in pay scale for one year without cumulative effect. (Paras 3, 16, 18)
(B) Disciplinary Proceedings - The court emphasized the importance of proper service of summons and the consequences of false endorsements on civil rights - The court acknowledged the long service of the petitioner but upheld the need for accountability in public office. (Paras 13, 14)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a judicial officer, was charged with returning summons with a false endorsement stating the party had died, leading to disciplinary action. The petitioner contended it was a bona fide mistake due to urgency.
Findings of Court:
The court found the disciplinary proceedings were conducted fairly and upheld the findings of the inquiry officer, but modified the punishment to avoid affecting pension benefits.
Issues: The main issues were the appropriateness of the punishment imposed and whether it considered the petitioner's long service and impending retirement.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that while the lapse was serious, the punishment should reflect the petitioner's long service and not adversely affect his retirement benefits.
Result: Writ petition disposed of with modified punishment.
ORDER :
(Order of the Court was made by G.ARUL MURUGAN, J.)
This writ petition is filed challenging the order of the second respondent dated 26.11.2024, by which the punishment of reduction in pay with cumulative effect, was imposed against the petitioner.
2. The petitioner originally joined the judicial department as an Office Assistant on 09.05.1983. He was thereafter promoted as a Junior Bailiff in the year 1990 and on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.11.2024, retired from service.
3. On allegations that when the petitioner was entrusted with serving summons in respect of five cases, he had not properly carried out his duties, a charge memo dated 12.12.2023 was issued framing one comprehensive charge under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1955 to the effect that the summons in respect to cases in (i) E.P.No.8/2023 in ACP.1466 of 2015, (ii) E.P.No.11 of 2023 in ACP.307/2020, (iii) E.P.No.10/2023 in ACP.306 of 2020, (iv) O.S.No.61 & 62 of 2023, and (v) O.S.No.20 of 2023, which were posted in the Lok Adalat, had been returned, stating that the party, Selvaraj, in O.S.No.62 of 2023 had died, whereas when the case was called in the Lok Adalat, the said Selvaraj had appeared in person with his Aadhar Card and other identity cards. Therefore, the petitioner had not carried out his duties and had returned the summons with a false endorsement.
4. The petitioner submitted his reply on 21.12.2023, and not satisfied with the explanation, an enquiry officer was appointed. Pursuant to the enquiry, the enquiry officer submitted a report on 03.08.2024. The disciplinary authority, concurring with the findings of the enquiry officer, by order dated 26.11.2024, imposed the punishment of reduction of basic pay to the next lower stage (Level-7 Index-35 to Level-7 Index-34) from the basic pay presently drawn by the delinquent in the existing pay matrix (cell index) as per Rule 8(iv) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955. Assailing the punishment imposed, the petitioner has preferred the above writ petition.
5. Mr.N.U.Pressanna, learned counsel for the petitioner, contended that the petitioner has put in long years of service with an unblemished record and the only charge is that he returned the summons by endorsing that the party had died which was due to a bona fide mistake. The disciplinary authority had not taken into account the valid explanation offered by the petitioner and therefore, the punishment imposed is unsustainable.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that when the petitioner was about to retire, the punishment had been imposed, which would affect both the service and pensionary benefits, which has not been taken note of by the disciplinary authority. He further contended that when the disciplinary authority had arrived at the conclusion to impose a minor punishment, due to the retirement date, ultimately a major punishment was imposed, which is erroneous and sought for the indulgence of this Court.
7. Contending contra, Mr.J.Chandran Sundar Sashi Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, submitted that it is a serious charge where the civil rights of the parties are involved and the act of the petitioner in returning summons by endorsing 'party died' will have very serious consequences, which could not be condoned. As such, the disciplinary authority initiated the appropriate enquiry, and the punishment was imposed for the proven charges. He further contended that after giving an explanation, the petitioner had also admitted his lapse, stating that due to certain urgency, he did not verify the person properly and it was only a mistake. In such circumstances, the punishment imposed is proportionate to the charges and the disciplinary authority had taken a lenient view, which needs no interference and sought for dismissal of the writ petition.
8. Heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record.
9. The petit
