Government officials cannot be heard to say that they skipped statutory procedures before initiating action against their subordinates just because a court had directed them to complete the task within a specified time frame, the Madras High Court Bench here has observed.
Justice K. Ravichandra Baabu made the observation while allowing a petition filed by a retired Additional Deputy Commercial Taxes Officer to quash an order passed by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes on May 7 to cut Rs. 1,000 a month from the petitioner’s pension for three years. The judge held that the Commissioner ought not to have imposed the punishment without consulting the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission (TNPSC) as required under the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules 1978 simply because the High Court had earlier directed him to pass orders within 30 days.
Mr. Justice Baabu said the writ petitioner, S. Manoharan (name changed) of Tuticorin, retired on May 31, 2006 after 33 years of service.
Two years later, the department issued a charge memo accusing him of having assisted a trader to evade sales tax to the tune of Rs. 60,000 in 2003. However, an enquiry officer, appointed to probe into the issue, filed a report on January 27, 2012, absolving the pensioner of all charges.
Notice issued
But the Commissioner disagreed with the enquiry report and issued a show-cause notice to the petitioner asking him as to why his pension should not be cut.
The writ petitioner objected to such cut and approached the High Court which directed the Commissioner last year to pass final orders within 30 days.
Hence, the officer expedited the proceedings and imposed the punishment without consulting the TNPSC, necessitating the present writ petition.
Holding the case in favour of the writ petitioner, the judge said the charge levelled against the petitioner could not be sustained even on merits since he had only been accused of issuing transit pass to the trader who reportedly sold the goods in the State without transporting them to Puducherry.
