##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 09-09-2026 CORAM THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR and WMP No.23576 of 2026 Dr.P. Muthuramalingam ..Petitioner(s)

Vs

1. The Secretary To Government Animal Husbandry and Veterinary services, Government of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, Chennai 600 009

2. The Director Directorate of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Services, No 571, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chenani 6000 35

3. The Regional Joint Director Department of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Services, Cuddalore 607 001

4. The Assistant Director Department of animal Husbandry and Veterinary Services, Cuddalore 607 001 ..Respondent(s)

Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus calling for the records of the 2^nd respondent in respect of the Impugned charge Memo issued by the 2^nd Respondent in Na.Ka. No 4083/ L2/ 2026 dated 07.05.2026 and quash the same and consequently direct the 2^nd respondent to extend all eligible service benefits.

For Petitioner(s): Ms.R.Maheshwari For Respondent(s): Mr.K.Sathish Additional Government Pleader.

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to in connection with the charge memo issued by the 2^nd respondent vide Na.ka.No.4083/L2/2026 dated 07.05.2026 and to quash the same and also sought for a consequential direction to the 2^nd respondent to extend all eligible service benefits to the petitioner. 2. The brief facts that are relevant for disposal of the writ petition are as under:

2.1. The petitioner is working as a Veterinary Assistant Surgeon at the Veterinary Dispensary, Thiruvandhipuram, Cuddalore District. While so, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 19.02.2026 requiring the petitioner to show cause as to why the disciplinary action under Rule 17(a) of Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Rules, 1955’), shall not be taken against him on the ground that the petitioner has posted messages in the WhatsApp group of the employees of the Animal Husbandry Department belittling and disparaging the work of all Animal Husbandry Inspectors, Ministerial Staff, Animal Husbandry Assistants, and local-body vehicle drivers and also posted the messages in the WhatsApp status in a manner to bring the Animal Husbandry Department into disrepute.

2.2. In response to the same, the petitioner submitted his explanation on

25.02.2026 denying the allegations and also contending that the Animal Husbandry Inspectors Association is acting prejudicially against the petitioner, as the petitioner has filed various writ petitions before this Court. However, it was thereafter the 2^nd respondent has issued the impugned charge memo dated 07.05.2026 framing three charges against the petitioner, more or less on the very same allegations as contained in the show cause notice dated 19.02.2026. The two letters given by the Tamil Nadu Livestock Inspectors Association were shown as the documents in support of the charges. However, at the same time, the witnesses that are sought to be examined in support of the charges is shown as ‘Nil’.

2.3. The petitioner also submitted his explanation in response to the said charge memo. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner has sought for furnishing of copies of the of the documents shown in Annexure-3 to the charge memo. But the said documents were not yet furnished to the petitioner. It is aggrieved by the said charge memo dated 07.05.2026, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.K.Sathish, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the respondents, having initiated disciplinary proceedings under Rule 17(a) of the Rules, 1955, for imposing a minor punishment, without concl