N.Karnakaran. Vs. the Commissioner of Municipal Administration

N.Karnakaran vs The Commissioner of Municipal Administration

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Jul 20, 2012

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/928172

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/928172
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: V.Dhanapalan, J.
Decided On: Jul 20, 2012
Case Number: W.P.Nos.9263 of 2007 And 19334 of 2012 (O.A.Nos.3117 And 3118 of 2012 )
Subject: Service

Case Summary

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

Service

Key legal issue: Service
Acts & sections: Tamil Nadu Civil Services (D And A) 1955 - Rule 17 (c)

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

N.Karnakaran

Advocate Mr.S.Ilamvazhudhi, Adv

Respondent

The Commissioner of Municipal Administration

Advocate Mr.R.Vijayakhumar, Adv.

Legal References

Acts: Tamil Nadu Civil Services (D And A) 1955 - Rule 17 (c)

Excerpt

prayer in both w.ps.:these petitions came to be numbered by transfer of o.a.no.3117 & 3118 of 2012 of 2002 from the file of the tamil nadu administrative tribunal, for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari, to quash the impugned show cause notice bearing roc. no.2519/93/ op3/c1 dated 17.05.2002 passed by the respondent, for dismissal from service.common order1. this order shall dispose of w.p.no.9263 of 2007 & 19334 of 2012, as the common question of fact and law are involved in these two writ petitions.2. the petitioners have invoked the equitable writ jurisdiction of this court to challenge the order passed under rule 17 (c) of the tamil nadu civil services (d & a) 1955. in view of the conviction in criminal case, the writ petitions as framed are not competent, as it is open to the petitioners to file reply to the show cause notice by raising all objections against the proposed punishment.3. both the writ petitions are dismissed being not competent, with liberty to the petitioners to file reply to the impugned show cause notice by taking all objections in accordance with law.no cost.

Full Judgment

PRAYER IN BOTH W.Ps.:

These petitions came to be numbered by transfer of O.A.No.3117 & 3118 of 2012 of 2002 from the file of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the impugned show cause notice bearing Roc. No.2519/93/ OP3/C1 dated 17.05.2002 passed by the respondent, for dismissal from service.

COMMON ORDER

1. This order shall dispose of W.P.No.9263 of 2007 & 19334 of 2012, as the common question of fact and law are involved in these two writ petitions.

2. The petitioners have invoked the equitable writ jurisdiction of this Court to challenge the order passed under Rule 17 (c) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (D & A) 1955. In view of the conviction in criminal case, the writ petitions as framed are not competent, as it is open to the petitioners to file reply to the show cause notice by raising all objections against the proposed punishment.

3. Both the writ petitions are dismissed being not competent, with liberty to the petitioners to file reply to the impugned show cause notice by taking all objections in accordance with law.

No cost.

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2012 Same Parties N.Karnakaran vs The Commissioner of Municipal Administration Same Subject Service Same Judge V.Dhanapalan, J. Acts & Sections Tamil Nadu Civil Services (D And A) 1955 - Rule 17 (c)