Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.Sathish Kumar, M.Jothiraman, JJ
The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (E1) Department – Appellant
Versus
M.S.Vijaya – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of charges and delayed departmental proceedings post-retirement. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 6) |
| 2. contentions on enquiry fairness and punishment proportionality. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. procedural defects in enquiry including cross-examination denial. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 4. limits of judicial review with proportionality doctrine. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
The order dated 07.11.2023 passed in W.P.(MD) No. 9979 of 2017 is under challenge.
2. Originally, the first respondent/writ petitioner filed a writ petition challenging the impugned order passed by the first appellant in G.O.Ms. (P) No. 107, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj (E1) Department, dated 08.03.2017.
3. According to the appellants, while the first respondent was serving as Assistant Project Officer (Rural) and had earlier held full additional charge as District Panchayat Secretary, Theni, she was charge-sheeted under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955, vide charge memo dated 04.08.2008 issued by the fourth appellant, the District Collector, Theni, pursuant to G.O.Ms. No.19, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (N) Department, dated 11.02.2008, and nine charges were framed aga
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
