Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 64531
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, G.ARUL MURUGAN, JJ
The Director of Elementary Education, Chennai – Appellant
Versus
A.R.Ponnazhagu – Respondent
Writ Appeal No.2339 of 2025 | C.M.P(MD)No.13239 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.J.Ashok
For the Respondents: Mr.P.Ganapathi Subramanian
Disciplinary proceedings may proceed without regard to concurrent criminal investigations, asserting that different standards apply to each process.
Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules - Disciplinary proceedings - Criminal proceedings may be initiated simultaneously with departmental proceedings; strict proof required in criminal cases differs from preponderance of probabilities in disciplinary matters - Conducting departmental proceedings during pendency of criminal cases is permitted unless exceptional circumstances exist (Paras 5, 8).
(B) Judicial Review - Writ courts should not interfere with processes in disciplinary matters unless there is a clear legal error in the decision-making process (Paras 10, 12).
Facts of the case:
The respondent challenged an order of suspension during the impending retirement related to disciplinary proceedings arising from a criminal case still at the F.I.R stage.
Findings of Court:
The writ Court's conclusions were not in line with established legal principles regarding the separation of criminal and disciplinary processes.
Issues: The court examined the validity of simultaneous criminal and departmental proceedings and the legal implications of a writ court interfering in such matters.
Ratio Decidendi: It was determined that disciplinary procedures may continue despite criminal proceedings, dismissing the writ Court's opposing reasoning.
Result: The writ order has been set aside and the Writ Appeal allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ appeal challenging suspension order. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. legal position on simultaneous criminal and departmental proceedings. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. writ court's role in reviewing disciplinary actions. (Para 8 , 10 , 12) |
| 4. writ order set aside; appeal allowed. (Para 13) |
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
The present Writ Appeal, filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, has been instituted by the Director of Elementary Education and four other officials to assail the writ order dated 26.06.2023 passed in W.P(MD)No.25001 of 2022.
2.The respondent/Mr.A.R.Ponnazhagu filed a Writ Petition challenging the order of suspension passed on the eve of his retirement and the retention in service, enabling the authorities to complete the departmental disciplinary proceedings initiated against him.
3.The writ Court has not adjudicated the issues in entirety but formed an opinion that the criminal case registered against the respondent was in the F.I.R stage and directed the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Pudukottai, to complete the investigation and file a final report within a period of four months. The writ Court further observed by stating that the writ Court had not gone into the merits of the matter, however, made a finding that if the respondent is exonerated in the final report filed in the criminal case, the suspension order has to be revoked and all the retirement benefits are to be disbursed in favour of the respondent.
4.In view of the above writ order, this Court is inclined to examine the legal position to be followed in a disciplinary proceedings initiated against the Government servants.
5.Criminal proceedings and departmental proceedings can be initiated simultaneously and there is no bar. On registration of a criminal case, a Government servant may be placed under suspension under the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. During the pendency of the criminal proceedings, there is no bar to continue the departmental proceedings if the records are either available with the department or by collecting the records from the Investigating Officer or by getting certified copies from the criminal Courts where the records are filed. In essence, there is no bar for continuing the departmental disciplinary proceedings during the pendency of a criminal case. This position has been time and again reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in unequivocal terms and the Government also issued orders/guidelines directing the disciplinary authorities not to keep the departmental proceedings in abeyance during the pendency of the criminal case, except in cases where the departmental proceedings are unable to be continued for want of records.
6.In the present case, no such exceptional circumstances existed when the writ order impugned was passed. The criminal case was in the F.I.R stage. It is unnecessary for the writ Court to direct the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, Pudukottai to file a final report within four months in a Writ Petition filed challenging the order of suspension and the consequential order of retention of service passed by the competent authority continuing the services of the delinquent employee, since he was due to retire on attaining the age of superannuation. 7.The second finding of the writ Court that in the event of exoneration in the final report filed in consequent to the investigation, the retirement benefits are to be settled is also running counter to the legal position settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.
8.Criminal proceedings and departmental proceedings are distinct and different. Strict proof is required to convict a person in a criminal case. No such strict proof is required to punish an employee under the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. Preponderance of probabilities are sufficient to punish a Government employee. Misconduct cannot be equated with criminal o
