BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 11.02.2026 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.K.RAMAKRISHNAN W.P(MD)No.25825 of 2025 and W.M.P(MD)No.20217 of 2025 V.Dhanabalan ... Petitioner .Vs.

1.The Principal District Judge, Kanyakumari, at Nagercoil- 629 001, Kanniyakumari District.

2.The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kanyakumari District, at Nagercoil – 629 001, Kanniyakumari District. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order dated 1.7.2024 of the first respondent confirming the order in D.No.866/2024, dated 6.5.2024 of the second respondent imposing the punishment of stoppage of increment for one year without cumulative effect and to quash the same and consequently to direct the respondents to pay back the mount of Rs.39,600/- with

12% interest recovered by them.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.R.Sreenivasan For Respondents : Mr.D.Sivaraman

1 and 2 Standing Counsel

O R D E R

(Order of the Court was made by DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN This Writ Petition has been filed seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus filed by one Dhanabalan who was the former employee of the District Judiciary against whom disciplinary proceedings was initiated for dereliction of duty based on the complaint given by one Kannaki.

2.The charge against the Petitioner herein is in respect of missing of three interlocutory applications filed in M.C.No.168 of 2013 and the deficit stamp papers worth about Rs.28,263/-.The award in M.C.No.168 of 2014 was passed on 20.1.2015.The claimant namely, Kannaki and her children has taken out application for permission to withdraw the award amount and also application to file deficit Court Fees along with Court Fees paper. The records indicates that Court Fees of Rs.28,263/- was received and C.F.No.699 toi 702 has been assigned and the same been registered in C.R.19 Register. The petitioner herein put his initial in the CR Register. Thereafter, neither the stamp paper nor the interlocutory applications were put up in the bundle. The claimant Kannaki had stated that her repeated enquiry with the counsel on record did not yield any result and therefore. She has brought the matter to the notice of the administration through her complaint, dated 31.10.2022. Pursuant to the complaint, remarks were called for from the Petitioner vide Official Memorandum, dated 02.11.2022. After receiving his remarks, charges under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services(Discipline and Appeal)Rules, 1955(herein referred to as ‘Rules’) was framed and an enquiry was conducted. The Disciplinary Authority thought it fit that the misconduct does not warrant major punishment under Rule 17(b) of the above Rules and proceed under Section 17(a) of the Rules and imposed punishment of stoppage of increment for one year without cumulative effect. The Petitioner is aggrieved by the punishment imposed on him for the following reasons:

3.Action taken for misconduct after seven years of the alleged misconduct is a belated action which caused grave prejudice to the Petitioner due to efflux of time, for non granting of proper defense due to efflux of time and in the earlier enquiry conducted by the enquiry officer who also happens to be the Disciplinary Authority, has proceeded to pass the proposed punishment without any competency or authority.

4.The learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that allegations in the complaint is that after the award made in M.C.No.168 of 2013, it is alleged that deficit Court Fee was presented by the claimant to the Grade-II Bench Clerk on 1.4.2015 and the same was received by the Petitioner as Bench Clerk of Chief Judicial Magistrate Court. The complaint has emanated from the claimant only on 31.10.2022 after a lapse of seven years. Due to fading memory, he was not able to give proper explanation at the first instance