IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 07.03.2017 CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.V.MURALIDARAN W.P.Nos.2582 and 2583 of 2014 and M.P.Nos.1 and 1 of 2014
1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Rep. by its Chairman Cum Managing Director, Bharat Sanchar Bhavan, Harish Chandra Mathur Lane, Janpath, New Delhi.
2. General Manager, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Salem.
3. Deputy General Manager (Admn., & HR) O/o. General Manager, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Salem.
4. The Senior General Manager, BSNL, Salem SSA, Salem.
5. The Assistant General Manager, NWP - CFA, O/o. General Manager, BSNL, Salem. ...Petitioners in both WPs vs.
1. K.Lakshmanakumar
2. The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, City Civil Court Building, Chennai - 600 104. ..Respondents in both WPs Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the second respondent Tribunal dated 11.11.2013 made in O.A.Nos.408 and 462 of 2013 respectively and quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.S.Udayakumar For Respondents : Mr.T.Muruganantham for R1 R2 - Tribunal
C O M M O N O R D E R
K.K. SASIDHARAN,J.
The first respondent was convicted by a criminal court for an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. In view of the conviction, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) initiated disciplinary action against him. The show cause notice issued by the BSNL was challenged by the first respondent in the original application in O.A.No.462 of 2013.
2. The first respondent was suspended by BSNL pending initiation of disciplinary proceedings. The said order was challenged in the original application in O.A.No.408 of 2013.
3. The Central Administrative Tribunal quashed the proceedings initiated by BSNL. Feeling aggrieved, the BSNL has come up with these two writ petitions.
4. The learned Standing counsel appearing for BSNL fairly submitted that during the currency of these writ petitions, the first respondent settled the matter with the complainant and consequently, he was reinstated in service by BSNL.
5. In view of the subsequent events indicated above, nothing survives for adjudication in these writ petitions.
K.K.SASIDHARAN,J.
and M.V.MURALIDARAN,J.
(svki)
6. The writ petitions are dismissed as infructuous. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
svki (K.K.SASIDHARAN.,J.) (M.V.MURALIDARAN.,J.) 7 March 2017 To The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, City Civil Court Building, Chennai - 600 104.
W.P.Nos.2582 and 2583 of 2014 http://www.judis.nic.in