IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 21.06.2022

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

WRIT PETITION NO.2507 OF 2015

K.Kumaradoss

...Petitioner

Vs

1.The Principal Secretary to Government,

Home Department, Secretariat,

Fort St. George,

Chennai-9.

2.The Director General of Police,

Mylapore,

Chennai-4.

3.The Commissioner of Police,

Chennai Police,

Vepery, Chennai-7.

4.The Dy. Commissioner of Police,

Ambattur District,

Chennai.

5.The Dy. Commissioner of Police,

Madhavaram District,

Chennai.

...Respondents

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of

Certiorarified Mandamus,

Calling for the records in the

connection with the charge memo P.R. No.53/H-1/2010 dated

09.04.2010 issued by the 4th Respondent herein and the order of

punishment PR No.53/H1/2010 CSPO.No. 1923/2010 dated 17.09.2010

passed by the 5th respondent herein and the order of rejection

on appeal RC.No. HI/1212/ 61177/2010 Appeal No.59/HI 2010 dated

26.10.2010 passed by the 3rd Respondent herein and the order of

rejection on review application G.O.(2D) No.446 dated 13.08.2013

passed by the 1st respondent herein and quash the same and

consequently direct the respondents to promote the petitioner to

the post of SSI from the date of 09.04.2010 with all service and

terminal benefits.

For Petitioner

:

Dr.R.Sampathkumar

For Respondents

:

Mrs.S.Anitha

Special Government Pleader

O R D E R

The writ petition is filed challenging the order of

punishment of reduction in time scale of pay by three stages for

three years and the period of reduction shall operate to

postpone future increments for three years. The appellate

authorities also have confirmed the order of punishment. Thus,

the petitioner is constrained to move the present writ petition.

2. The writ petitioner was recruited as Gr-II Police

Constable in the year 1977. He was promoted upto the level of

Special Sub Inspector of Police and retired from service on

attaining the age of superannuation, in the year 2010. The

petitioner was allowed to retire from service. While he was in

service, a charge memo was issued with an allegation that the

writ petitioner was receiving mamool of Rs.50/- twice a week

from one Mr.Ravi, S/o. Shanmugam, who was running a bunk shop

nearby TASMAC Shop No.9033 at Keezhkondaiyar, Periyar Nagar.

3. The charge memo reveals that statement of misconduct and

the list of documents relied upon as well as the list of

witnesses examined were stated. An enquiry officer was

appointed, who in turn conducted an enquiry with reference to

the charges framed against the writ petitioner. The writ

petitioner participated in the process of enquiry. The writ

petitioner has cross examined the department witnesses and the

enquiry officer submitted his enquiry report, holding that the

charge against the writ petitioner was held proved. The

disciplinary authority accepted the findings of the enquiry

officer and imposed the punishment of reduction in time scale of

pay by three stages for three years and the period of reduction

shall operate to postpone future increments for three years.

the petitioner peferred appeals and the said appeals were

rejected.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended

that the writ petitoner was having unblemished record of service

for about 35 years and the charges are based on certain false

complaint. There was no shop nearby the TASMAC shop as alleged

by the complainant. the enquiry was not conducted properly and

the documents relied on were not supplied. That apart, the

punishment of reduction in time scale of pay by three stages was

imposed during the fag end of retirement and thus, such a

punishment cannot be implemented.

5. The learned counsel for