W.P.(MD) No.7046 of 2019

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 11.02.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

W.P.(MD) No.7046 of 2019

and

W.M.P.(MD) Nos.5643 & 5644 of 2019

A.Somasundararajan

... Petitioner

-vs-

The Principal Secretary to Government,

Public Works (E1),

Fort St. George, Chennai.

... Respondent

Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for

the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the

respondent in G.O(D) No.279 dated 27.08.2018 and quash the same with

a consequential direction directing the respondent to reinstate the

petitioner into service.

For Petitioner

:

Ms.Porkodi Karnan

for M/s.Polax Legal Solutions

For Respondent

:

Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar,

Additional Government Pleader

O R D E R

The order of suspension, issued in G.O.(D) No.279, dated

27.08.2018 is under challenge in the present writ petition.

2.The petitioner is working as an Assistant Engineer in the

Water Resources Department and he was placed under suspension on

account of the criminal cases in Special Case Nos.2/2017 and 3/2017.

3.Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of

the respondent brought to the notice of this Court that the criminal

cases are relating to corruption and cases were registered under the

provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act. Therefore, the

petitioner was placed under suspension and the criminal cases are

still pending.

4.This Court is of the considered opinion that simultaneous

proceedings are permissible. On initiation of departmental

disciplinary proceedings, based on the registration of Criminal Case

1/7

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

W.P.(MD) No.7046 of 2019

under the Prevention of Corruption Act, the authorities competent

are empowered to continue the departmental disciplinary proceedings.

In such circumstances, the authorities are at liberty to collect all

the documents from the Investigating Agencies, if the documents were

already seized of or if the documents are available with the

Department itself, they shall proceed by framing charges and final

orders are to be passed in the departmental disciplinary

proceedings. Contrarily, an employee need not be kept under

suspension for a prolonged period and the same is not desirable.

Therefore, on initiation of disciplinary proceedings, the

authorities competent must ensure that in the event of availability

of records, frame charges and dispose of the departmental

disciplinary proceedings. If no records are available, then they

may collect those records from the Investigating Agency or from the

authorities and proceed with the disciplinary proceedings. If the

collection of records is not possible then, a decision is to be

taken to keep the disciplinary proceedings in abeyance till the

disposal of the criminal case. In the event of taking such a

decision, the order of suspension is to be reviewed and continuance

of suspension is necessary or not has to be taken into

consideration. If an employee is kept under suspension for an

indefinite period, the same would cause financial loss to the State

Exchequer, as without extracting any work, subsistence allowance is

paid. All such mitigating factors also to be considered.

Contrarily, the petitioner may be reinstated and posted in a non-

sensitive post till the disposal of the criminal case and

departmental disciplinary proceedings.

5.The principles, in the event of simultaneous proceedings, to

be followed are summarised by this Court in W.P.(MD) No.14356 of

2019 and the operative portion of the order dated 08.02.2022 reads

as follows:-

“5.In view of the complex nature of issues raising

doubt in the minds of the disciplinary authority, this

Court is inclined to summarize the following principles,

which are all to be