Advocates:
['KARTHIK RAJAN', 'm/s g sankaran', '', 'S NEDUNCHEZHIYAN-MS', 'a maheshnath']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 02.09.2020

C O R A M

The Hon'ble Mr. AMRESHWAR PRATAP SAHI, THE CHIEF JUSTICE

and

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

Writ Appeal No.599 of 2020

&

C.M.P.No.8324 of 2020

1. Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution

Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO)

(Formerly Tamil Nadu Electricity Board),

Rep. By its Chairman-cum-Managing Director,

No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

2. The Chief Engineer (Personnel)

Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution

Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO)

(Formerly Tamil Nadu Electricity Board),

Rep. By its Chairman-cum-Managing Director,

No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 002.

3. The Chief Engineer (Distribution)

Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution

Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO)

(Formerly Tamil Nadu Electricity Board),

Villupuram Region, Villupuram.

4. The Superintending Engineer,

Thiruvannamalai Electricity Distribution Circle,

Tamil Nadu Generation & Distribution

Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO)

(Formerly Tamil Nadu Electricity Board),

Vengal, Thiruvannamalai.

...Appellants/Respondents

Vs

A.Srinivasan

...Respondent/Petitioner

PRAYER : Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent,

to set aside the order dated 27.02.2020 made in W.P.No.3398 of

2020.

W.P.No.3398/2020:

Writ Petition praying to call for the records relating to

the impugned order issued by the 4^th Respondent in Memo

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

No.601/245/Adm3/A1/F.D.P. 2017 dated 13.01.2017 and to quash

and consequently direct the Respondents to reinstate the

Petitioner into service with consequential and attendant

benefits.

For Appellants : Mr.Karthik Rajan

For Respondent : Mr.G.Sankaran

JUDGMENT

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY J.,

The Respondent herein is an employee of the Appellant and

was working as a Junior Engineer [Electrical Grade I] in

Thiruvannamalai Electricity Distribution Circle. During the

course of employment, a trap was laid by the Vigilance and Anti-

corruption Department on 09.01.2017, and the Respondent was

found to have demanded illegal gratification to fix the change

over switch. On that basis, he was arrested. Pursuant

thereto, he was placed under deemed suspension on 13.01.2017 and

such suspension has continued till date. A criminal case was

registered against the Respondent under Section 7 of the

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the said case is

presently pending as S.C.No.53 of 2018 before the Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Thiruvannamalai. On account of the continuation of

the suspension, he filed W.P. No.3398 of 2020 to challenge the

proceedings by which he was placed under suspension. By order

dated 27.02.2020, the learned single Judge allowed the writ

petition by revoking the suspension and directing that the

Respondent/Petitioner be placed in a non-sensitive post. The

learned single Judge further directed the Chief Judicial

Magistrate-cum-Special Court, Thiruvannamalai, to complete the

proceedings in Spl.C.C.No.53 of 2018 within a period of four

months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The said

order is impugned herein.

2. We heard the learned standing counsel, Mr.Karthik Rajan,

for the Appellants and the learned counsel, Mr.G.Sankaran, for

the respondent.

3. The learned counsel, Mr.Karthik Rajan, pointed out that

the Respondent is being prosecuted before the Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Thiruvannamalai, in a serious corruption case and,

therefore, the continuation of the suspension by the Appellants

cannot be faulted. In particular, he contends that the ratio of

the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ajay Kumar

Choudhary v. Union of India [2015 (7) SCC 291] (Ajay Kumar

Choudhary) is not applicable in a situation wherein criminal

proceeding