Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J
Karuppasamy – Appellant
Versus
The Director of Medical Education and Research, Kilpauk, Chennai 600 010. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenges to suspension and charge memo heard. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. no interference with concluded charge memo enquiry. (Para 3) |
| 3. suspension due to unrelated criminal arrest; review needed. (Para 4) |
| 4. g.o. guidelines mandate suspension review. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 5. direct review of suspension within four weeks. (Para 7 , 8) |
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the proceedings Reg. No. 6761/E4/2025 dated 26.06.2025 issued by the third respondent placing the petitioner under suspension and the impugned charge memo bearing Na.Ka.No.6761/Ni4/2025 dated 09.08.2025 issued against the petitioners.
2.Heard Mr.R.Murugan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.S.Shaji Bino, learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents.
3. Insofar as the challenge with regard to the impugned charge memo dated 09.08.2025 is concerned, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition as there are no grounds made out for interfering with the impugned charge memo. It is also brought to the notice of this Court by the third respondent by filing a counter affidavit that the enquiry pursuant to the impugned charge memo was already conducted and the entire enquiry p
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
