IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :19.09.2017 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.V.MURALIDARAN W.P.No.7861 of 2004 R.Perumal ... Petitioner Vs.
1. The Registrar, Madurai Kamaraj University, Palkalai Nagar, Madurai - 21.
2. The Warden, Women's Hostel, Madurai Kamaraj University, Palkalai Nagar, Madurai - 21.
... Respondents Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 01.04.2003 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner back in the same post with all consequential benefits.
For Petitioner :M/s.T.R.Sundaram For Respondents :Mr.Godson Swaminathan for M/s.Isaac Chambers for R1 O R D E R The writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the proceedings of the 2nd respondent dated 01.04.2003 and to quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner back in the same post with all consequential benefits.
2. Heard the submissions of Mr.T.R.Sundaram, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.Godson Swaminathan for M/s.Isaac Chambers appearing for the 1st respondent.
3. It is the case of the writ petitioner that the petitioner is working as a Watchman in the respondents University. The petitioner has misbehaved with a girl student in the Women's Hostel and based on the said occurrence, the present termination order dated 01.04.2003 was passed.
4. The impugned order, which contains only four lines, states that as per the directions of the Registrar and the Vice Chancellor and based on the enquiry conducted by the Campus Welfare Committee on 31.03.2003, the petitioner's services has been terminated with effect from 01.04.2003.
5. This Court and the Hon'ble Apex Court have categorically held that while terminating the services of the person who has been permanently employed, the authorities should follow the procedure by conducting an enquiry and pass appropriate orders.
6. Admittedly, the impugned order says that based on the enquiry conducted by the Campus Welfare Committee on 31.03.2003, the impugned order was passed but there is no evidence to show that the enquiry was conducted and the petitioner was examined. Therefore, it is totally failure on the part of the respondent University.
7. However, the learned counsel for the respondents referred to Page No.3 of the counter affidavit and submitted that by letter dated 10.06.2003 the petitioner apologised for his misconduct and requested for re-employment.
8. The order of termination was passed on 01.04.2003 but the letter of the petitioner was dated 10.06.2003 i.e. after two months from the date of termination order and hence the admission of misconduct by the petitioner is incorrect and the impugned order dated 01.04.2003 is against the principles of natural justice.
9. Therefore, I am inclined to set aside the order by directing the respondent/University to pass appropriate orders by giving fair opportunity and by conducting enquiry by following the principles of natural justice.
10. In the result:
(a) This Writ petition is allowed by setting aside the order dated 01.04.2003 passed by the second respondent;
(b) The matter is remanded back to the second respondent for giving fair opportunity to the petitioner and pass appropriate orders on merits;
(c) The second respondent is directed to complete the said exercise within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
19.09.2017 ub Index: Yes/ No Internet: Yes/ No To
1. The Registrar, Madurai Kamaraj University, Palkalai Nagar, Madurai - 21.
2. The Warden, Women's Hostel, Madurai Kamaraj University, Palkalai Nagar, Madurai - 21.
M.V.MURALIDARAN ub W.P.No.7861 of 2004 19.09.2017