Petitioner Vs. Respondent

Petitioner vs Respondent

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Jul 20, 2016

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1189718

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1189718
Court: Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge: T. Raja
Decided On: Jul 20, 2016
Case Number: W.P.(MD).No.12689 of 2016 & W.M.P.(MD).Nos. 9598 & 9599 of 2016
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Petitioner

Respondent

Excerpt

t. raja, j. 1. learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that having given clean chit against the charges impugned in the present writ petition on 27.09.2011, once again, the very same charge memo has been issued on the same set of allegation. hence, he prayed for staying of the impugned order. 2. a reading of the proceedings dated 22.06.2016 issued by the second respondent bearing file no.47297/2010/h2 shows that the petitioner was subjected to the departmental proceedings for the same identical similar charges, in an earlier occasion also. finally, the second respondent applying g.o.ms.no.155 dated 16.07.1993 has dismissed all the charges levelled against the petitioner 'as not proved'. 3. prima facie, it appears that the petitioner has been again issued with the very same charge memo, to which, already clean chit has been given by the respondents. 4. in view of the above, notice through court as well privately returnable by 22.08.2016. in the meanwhile, there shall be an order of interim stay. the respondents are directed to file counter by 22.08.2016.

Full Judgment

T. Raja, J.

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that having given clean chit against the charges impugned in the present Writ Petition on 27.09.2011, once again, the very same charge memo has been issued on the same set of allegation. Hence, he prayed for staying of the impugned order.

2. A reading of the proceedings dated 22.06.2016 issued by the second respondent bearing file No.47297/2010/H2 shows that the petitioner was subjected to the departmental proceedings for the same identical similar charges, in an earlier occasion also. Finally, the second respondent applying G.O.Ms.No.155 dated 16.07.1993 has dismissed all the charges levelled against the petitioner 'as not proved'.

3. prima facie, it appears that the petitioner has been again issued with the very same charge memo, to which, already clean chit has been given by the respondents.

4. In view of the above, notice through Court as well privately returnable by 22.08.2016. In the meanwhile, there shall be an order of interim stay. The respondents are directed to file counter by 22.08.2016.

Same Court & Year Chennai Madurai · 2016 Same Parties Petitioner vs Respondent Same Subject Education Same Judge T. Raja