9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 1491X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... HOP SUPERVISOR, TASMAC [ 2019 (2) TMI 1929 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] , which squarely apply to the facts of the present case. The petitioner has been punished without even giving an opportunity. Without deciding the charge that has been made against the petitioner, the petitioner has been directed to pay the amount and on non payment, the petitioner has also been suspended from service. This clearly constitutes predetermination of the entire issue. The 3rd respondent cannot compel the petitioner to first pay the penalty and GST, and thereafter participate in the enquiry, and on nonpayment cannot suspend the petitioner. This procedure adopted by the 3rd respondent is like putting the cart before the horse. The petitioner is first punished an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 06.2019, and it was found that the petitioner was selling each liquor bottle by adding an extra amount more than the maximum retail price. Immediately, a show cause notice came to be given to the petitioner on 04.10.2019, calling upon the petitioner to submit his explanation. 4. The petitioner had submitted his explanation to the 3rd respondent. After the receipt of the explanation, the impugned order came to be passed suspending the petitioner from his services on the ground that the explanation is not satisfactory and the petitioner has not paid the penalty with GST as directed in the show cause notice. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the entire exercise that was carried out by the 3rd respondent was pre-det ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cted hereunder: 7. This Court is of an opinion that any order affecting the rights of an employee must be issued at least by providing an opportunity to the delinquent official to defend his case in the manner known to law. As far as the other Statutes are concerned, the respondents are bound to follow the procedures contemplated under the Act. 8. However, for imposing penalty and for imposing minor punishments, the procedure of issuing show-cause notice and receiving explanations/objections are to be followed by the authorities before taking a decision and passing orders. 09. On a perusal of the impugned order itself, it is clear that no such show-cause notice was issued to the writ petitioner. 10. The learned counsel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he present case. The petitioner has been punished without even giving an opportunity. Without deciding the charge that has been made against the petitioner, the petitioner has been directed to pay the amount and on non payment, the petitioner has also been suspended from service. This clearly constitutes predetermination of the entire issue. The 3rd respondent cannot compel the petitioner to first pay the penalty and GST, and thereafter participate in the enquiry, and on nonpayment cannot suspend the petitioner. This procedure adopted by the 3rd respondent is like putting the cart before the horse. The petitioner is first punished and thereafter he is asked to attend for an enquiry. This clearly goes against the principles of natural justic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
