This Writ Petition is filed to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for records of the second respondent, connected with the impugned memorandum of charge in Ref:MR:Per:00:93:2002 dated 21.10.222 and quash the same.
2. In W.P.M.P.No.60762 of 2002 by order dated 26.12.2002, this court passed the following order:-
"In view of the above, even though the writ petition is admitted by order dated 14.11.2002, I do not find any justification to stay the impugned charge memo dated 21.10.2002. The respondents are at liberty to proceed with the enquiry. However, the final decision passed on the finding of the enquiry shall be given effect to with the leave of this Court."
3. In terms of the order of this court, the enquiry has been conducted and final order has not been passed due to the pendency of the writ petition. At the time of final hearing of the writ petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has raised several questions of law in the writ petition challenging the charge memo. Counsel for the petitioner, however, fairly states that the final order can be passed and if aggrieved by the final order, the petitioner should be given liberty to challenge the same in accordance with law. He submitted that while challenging such final order to be passed by the respondents, petitioner should be permitted to raise the grounds raised in the writ petition for effective redressal.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents Mrs.Rita Chandrasekaran states that the enquiry is over and the final order of the competent authority has not been passed in view of the pendency of the writ petition. The writ petition is not maintainable at this stage. After final order is passed, petitioner can challenge the said final order in accordance with law and the respondent department has no reservation for this manner of approach.
5. In the order passed in W.P.M.P.No.60762 of 2002 dated 26.12.2002, the petitioner was asked to submit his reply to the charge memo and participate in the enquriy proceedings which he has done. The result of the enquiry proceedings can be either way. This Court does not find any just or good reason to interfere in the matter at the stage of enquiry. The respondents' plea deserves to be accepted.
6. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents as above, the proceedings under challenge is not interfered with and the petitioner is not entitled to any relief before this Court. The petitioner is at liberty to challenge the final order to be passed consequent to the charge memo, if the petitioner is aggrieved, and raise all the legal issues including the grounds raised in the present writ petition as permissible under law. The second respondent, as submitted by the learned counsel, is directed to pass final order on or before 30.6.2009 and serve the same on the petitioner immediately. The writ petition is disposed off accordingly. No order to costs.
ts To
1.The Chairman, United India Insurance Co. Ltd., 24, Whites Road, Royapettah, Royapettah, Chennai-14.
2.Assistant General Manager and Disciplinary Authority, United India insurance Co. Ltd., 40-42, Greams Road, Chennai 6