- (1.) HEARD the learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
(2.) THE petitioner has stated that he was, initially, appointed as an Assistant Engineer, on 17.6.1981, and thereafter, he had been promoted as an Assistant Divisional Engineer, on 4.4.2005. After working at various stations he had been transferred and posted at the office of the Assistant Divisional Engineer, National Highways Quality Control Sub-division, Madurai South, Madurai. While he was working as an Assistant Engineer at the Sengottai Panchayat Union, he was issued with a charge memo, under Rule 17(b) of the Tamilnadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955, on 14.11.1995, by the then Chief Engineer, High ways. The petitioner had been instructed to submit his explanation, in respect of the charges levelled against him. The petitioner has stated that the charges levelled against him are as follows: "Charge No.1: That he had no handed over the M.Books 344A, 1315C and 1307C relating to the work of improving and widening the carriage way from single lane to double lane in Aralvoimozhi, Nedumangadu Road KM.0/0-4/0 AND 4/0-b/0 to his successor of Thovalai section and thereby he had deserted his duties and responsibilities as Assistant Engineer. Charge No.2: That he had handed over the M.Book 344A, 1315C and 1307C to the Asst. Divisional Engineer Thiru J.Thangaraj Christopher illegally correct the check measurement etc. after his relief from the Thovalai Sec. without obtaining any acknowledgment from the Asst. Divi. Engr. and thereby he had misused his powers and failed to maintain integration and devotion to duty." It had also been stated that he had submitted a detailed explanation to the Chief Engineer, Highways, stating that he had not deserted his duties and responsibilities and that he had not misused the official position, as alleged in the charge memo, and that no loss had been caused to the Government. Thereafter, an enquiry officer had been appointed to enquire into the charges levelled against the petitioner. The enquiry officer had conducted the enquiry and had submitted his report with the finding that the charges levelled against the petitioner had been proved. The enquiry report had been furnished to the petitioner asking him to submit a further explanation, if any. On submission of the further explanation, the State government, without considering the said explanation submitted by the petitioner, properly, had passed a final order imposing the punishment of censure against the petitioner, in G.O.(3D) No.73, (Highways HL.1) Department, dated 6.5.2002.
(3.) THE petitioner had further stated that he was eligible and entitled to the promotion, as an Assistant Divisional Engineer, in the year 1999-2000 itself. However, his name had not been considered for promotion on the ground that the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him were pending. THEreafter, the petitioner had not been considered for such promotion, even for the years 2000-2001, 2001-2002 and 2002-2003, due to the currency of the punishment of censure. He was considered for promotion to the post of Assistant Divisional Engineer only in the year 2003-2004. In such circumstances, the petitioner had requested that his pay should be fixed on par with his junior T.K.Balasubramaniyan, who had been promoted as an Assistant Divisional Engineer, in the year 2001. However, the request of the petitioner had not been considered by the authorities concerned, even though the State Government had ordered retrospective promotion in other similar cases. Thereafter, the petitioner had made a representation, to the State Government, to consider his case for promotion, as an Assistant Divisional Engineer, on par with his junior and to fix his seniority accordingly. Since, no orders had been passed on the said representation, he had filed a writ petition before this Court, in W.P.No.24706 of 2007, to consider his representation and to pass an appropriate order, in the light of the government orders, in G.O.Ms.No.344, Public Works (HK-1) Department, dated 9.5.1995 and G.O.Ms.No.157, Public Works (H-1) Department, dated 25.2.1996. This Court, by its order, dated 21.7.2007, had directed the respondents to consider the request of the petitioner and to pass an appropriate order thereon.;