Sufficient evidence is required to uphold charges of corruption, and mere handling of money does not equate to knowledge of illicit activities.

ORDER :

HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR, J.

1. The challenge in this Writ Petition is to the Government Order dated 26.03.2018 passed by the first respondent in G.O.Ms.No.41, Cooperation, Food and Consumer Protection (CE2) Department.

2. The petitioner, while serving as Personal Clerk to the Director of Audit for Milk Cooperatives, Chennai, was issued with a charge memo. Similarly, the Director of Audit for Milk Cooperatives, Chennai, was also issued with a charge memo.

3. Charge against accused No.1 reads thus :

“While you (Accused Officer-I) were working as the Director of Audit for Milk Co-operative, Chennai-28, actuated by corrupt motive and in abuse of your official position and authority, on 31.7.2002, at your (A.O 1’s) office, Chennai, you have demanded Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) as bribe from the complainant Thiru N.Sekar, Junior Co-operative Auditor, Anaicut Circle, Vellore District, for allowing him to join duty on the expiry of Medical Leave and on 5.8.2002, when Thiru N.Sekar met you at your office and pleaded his inability, you directed the complainant Thiru N.Sekar to pay Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) as advance and to pay the remaining amount of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) after joining duty.

On 13.8.2002 at about 02.00 P.M., when Thiru N.Sekar met you in your chamber at the office of the Director of Audit for Milk Co-operative, Chennai and offered Rs.10,000/- as demanded by you, you directed him to place the said amount on your table and accordingly Thiru N.Sekar kept the amount on your table and you reiterated your earlier demand saying “michcham ennachu”. Further, you handed over the said bribe amount of Rs.10,000/- to Selvi K.Banumathi, (A.O.2) your Personal Clerk and with an ulterior motive directed her to keep the amount in her custody. You had received Rs.10,000/- as illegal gratification other than legal remuneration as a motive or reward for allowing Thiru N.Sekar to join duty on the expiry of Medical Leave.

Thus, you (A.O.1) had failed to maintain absolute integrity and devotion to duty and violated Rule 20 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants’ Conduct Rules,1973.”

4. Charge against the petitioner reads thus :

“While you (Accused Officer-2) were working as the Personal Clerk to Director of Audit for Milk Co-operatives, Chennai, actuated by corrupt motive and in abuse of your (A.O.2’s) official position, on 13.8.2002 at about 14.00 hrs. on the direction of Thiru S.Ponmani (A.O.1) you have received the bribe amount of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) from Thiru S.Ponmani (A.O.1) knowing the same was bribe amount and took the said bribe amount Rs.10,000/- to your table and kept the amount below a file and you conducted yourself in a manner which is unbecoming of a Government Servant. Thus, you (A.O.2) have failed to maintain absolute integrity and devotion to duty and violated Rule 20 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants’ Conduct Rules,1973.”

5. The petitioner replied to the show cause notice denying the charge. However, the explanation offered by the petitioner was found to be unsatisfactory, and a departmental inquiry was initiated against the petitioner as well as Accused No.1. Thereafter, a common inquiry was conducted against the petitioner (Accused No.2) and Accused No.1 – Director.

6. Before the Inquiry Officer, the prosecution examined 15 witnesses as P.Ws.1 to 15 and marked 29 documents. The Inquiry Officer, after appreciating the evidence on record, held that the charges against the petitioner as well as Accused No.1 were proved. The in