![]() Online edition of India's National Newspaper Saturday, Aug 09, 2008 ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Tamil Nadu |
![]() |
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Retail Plus | Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary |
Tamil Nadu
Petitioner claims he was sacked without holding an enquiry CHENNAI: The Madras High Court on Friday ordered notice on a writ petition by a Grade II Warder of the Central Prison, Puzhal, challenging an order of the DIG, Chennai range, Central Prison II, Puzhal, dismissing him from service without an enquiry. Justice N. Paul Vasanthakumar dismissed the plea for an interim stay of the dismissal order and a direction to authorities to reinstate him in service pending disposal of the writ petition. In his petition, K. Solomon, said he was appointed a Grade II Warder in March 1998. While working in Central Prison II, Puzhal, Chennai, the DIG, by an order dated August 2, placed him under suspension stating that he had been arrested and released on bail for demanding and accepting Rs.8000 as bribe from Sivashanmugam for arranging a separate cell and facilities for his friends. It was also stated that the order of suspension was passed in public interest under the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal rules.) He was dismissed from service on August 4. The dismissal order stated that demanding and accepting a bribe for providing facilities to a prisoner was considered grave in the interest of prison administration and security. The uniformed force had to maintain discipline. The petitioner submitted that having invoked the Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules for placing him under suspension, it was not open to the authorities to short-circuit the guarantee under Article 311 of the Constitution. An enquiry must be held before issuing the dismissal order. The authorities failed to give any reason as to why the enquiry had been dispensed with. The dismissal order suffered from non-application of mind and was a non-speaking order. He prayed that the court call for relevant records, quash the dismissal order and direct the respondent to reinstate him.
Printer friendly
page
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Home |
Copyright © 2008, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|