IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

RESERVED ON : 21.02.2022

DELIVERED ON : 22.03.2022

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.KALYANASUNDARAM

AND

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE R.HEMALATHA

W.P.NO.30225 OF 2019

AND

W.M.P.NOS.30197 & 30198 OF 2019

Dhanalakshmi

... Petitioner

Vs.

1. State represented by

Additional Chief Secretary,

Home Secretary, Home Department,

Secretariat, Chennai - 9.

2. The District Collector,

Thiruvallur, Thiruvallur District.

3. The Superintendent of Police,

Thiruvallur, Thiruvallur District.

... Respondents

PRAYER :

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the

records made in the impugned order in G.O.Ms.No.1214, dated

16.10.2019 on the file of 1st respondent herein and quash the

same and pass orders permitting the petitioner to continue the

position as Special Public Prosecutor, Fast Track, Mahila Court,

Thiruvallur.

For Appellant

: Mr.P.Subba Reddy

For Respondents : Mrs.V.Yamuna Devi

Special Government Pleader

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

JUDGMENT

(R.HEMALATHA, J.)

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner,

Dhanalakshmi, formerly Special Public Prosecutor of Fast Track

Mahila Court, Thiruvallur. She has sought for quashing the

impugned order in G.O.Ms.No.1214 dated 16.10.2019 in which her

services as Special Public Prosecutor was terminated with

immediate effect.

2.Briefly the facts of the case is elicited below :

The petitioner was appointed as Special Public Prosecutor of

Fast Track Mahila Court, Thiruvallur vide G.O.(D) No.680 Home

(Cts VIA) Department dated 02.09.2015 on temporary basis and

subsequently was appointed to the same post for a period of

three years vide G.O.(D) No.42, Home (Courts - VIA) Department

dated 08.01.2018. According to her, she was sincere and

hardworking and out of 439 cases disposed, she was instrumental

in ensuring conviction and severe punishments in 16 cases which

was widely appreciated by the Police, Bench and Bar. However,

according to her an anonymous complaint against her casting

aspersions on her honesty and integrity was taken cognisance by

the then District Collector Thiruvallur (2nd respondent) who

summoned her on 11.07.2019 and recorded her statement and

remarks on the said complaint. Based on the report of the then

Superintendent of Police (3rd respondent) and the District

Collector's findings, the State Government (1st respondent)

issued the impugned G.O.Ms.No.1214 dated 16.10.2019 terminating

her service as Special Public Prosecutor. This according to the

petitioner was unreasonable and unjust. It also was a clear

violation of the principles of natural justice and violative of

Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constituion of India.

3.Per Contra, the first respondent in his reply

affidavit highlighted the following:

i. The complaint against her was not an anonymous letter but a

formal one by the Thiruvalllur Advocate Association about

her dishonesty.

ii.Her poor track record of losing as many as 150 cases due to

her deliberate inaction was in fact true.

iii.There was a written complaint from one Kalaiselvan

alleging that he was an eyewitness to the petitioner taking

illegal gratification from the accused and informing the

complainant Kalaiselvan that he had a weak case. His

daughter was a victim of dowry and the petitioner had the

audacity to tell him that he had a weak case. The accused

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

persons claimed of assured acquittal due to the assurance

given by the petitioner.

iv.The second respondent had given the petitioner an

opportunity to explain herself.

v. The post was a temporary one and there was no hard and fast

rule as to the prior notice for termination. She was even

now eligible