Public excerpt

WP(MD)/23323/2024 of V.S.Arul Rajan Vs Registrar General - Madras High Court (Madras High Court)

Court: Madras High Court (Madras High Court) Case: HCMD011037962024 Parties: WP(MD)/23323/2024 of V.S.Arul Rajan Vs Registrar General Pages: 12 Characters (full): 15200

Full judgment text and the official PDF are available after sign-in. This page shows an excerpt for discovery and research previews only.

W.P(MD)No.23323 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 25.11.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH
and
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE
W.P(MD)No.23323 of 2024
V.S.Arul Rajan
... Petitioner
vs.
1. Registrar General,
High Court of Judicature at Madras,
High Court Road, Parry's Corner,  
George Town, Chennai,  
Tamil Nadu – 600 104.
2. Additional Registrar General (I/c), 
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,  
Melur Main Road, Ulaganeri,
Tamil Nadu – 625 023.
... Respondents
Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to 
issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records connected with the Impugned 
Order  issued  by the  1st respondent  in  ROC.No.25589/2020/Estt.II/MB  and 
ROC.No.23351-A/2021/B3/MB, dated 15.07.2022, and quash the same.
For Petitioners 
: Mr.Sriram Venkatavaradan
For Respondents
: Mr.N.Tamilmani
Page No.1 of 12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P(MD)No.23323 of 2024
ORDER
     (Order of the Court was made by M.S.RAMESH, J.)
The petitioner herein, while working in the Madurai Bench of the 
Madras High Court, was levelled with the following three charges under Rule 
17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeals) Rules, 1955, 
through a charge memo dated 28.07.2021:
''CHARGE No.1
That you, Thiru. V.S.Arulrajan, formerly P.S. to the Hon'ble Judges, 
now  Sub  Assistant  Registrar  (Insolvents,  Accounts),  High  Court, 
Madras, while working in the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, 
Madurai, were habitually indulging in lending money for interest to 
the Madras High Court staff members and also running Chit Fund, 
against Rule 6 & 7 of the Tamil Nadu Government Servants' Conduct 
Rules, 1973.
By your above action, you failed to maintain absolute integrity and 
devotion to duty and thereby you exhibited the conduct unbecoming 
of a Government Servant and violated the provision of Rule 20 of 
Tamil Nadu Government Servants' Conduct Rules, 1973.
CHARGE No.2
That you, Thiru. V.S.Arulrajan, formerly P.S. to the Hon'ble Judges, 
now  Sub  Assistant  Registrar  (Insolvents,  Accounts),  High  Court, 
Madras, have a bank account viz., A/c No. 722637937 with Indian 
Bank, High Court Branch, Madurai, wherein, several transactions 
were made by the individuals with whom you had official dealings 
and others, in violation of Rule 6 & 7 of the Tamil Nadu Government 
Page No.2 of 12
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W.P(MD)No.23323 of 2024
Servants' Conduct Rules, 1973.
By your above actions, you failed to maintain absolute integrity and 
devotion to duty and thereby you exhibited the conduct unbecoming 
of a Government Servant and violated the provision of Rule 20 of the 
Tamil Nadu Government Servants' Conduct Rules, 1973.
CHARGE No.3
That you, Thiru. V.S. Arulrajan, Sub Assistant Registrar (Insolvents, 
Accounts), High Court, Madras, were a member of a Chit Fund run 
by your cousin brother, however, you have neither obtained any 
permission, nor submitted any intimation or disclosed the same in the 
Statements of Return of Assets and Liabilities submitted by you as 
stipulated under Rule 6, 7 and 8 of the Tamil Nadu Government 
Servants' Conduct Rules, 1973.
By your act of wilful suppression  of fact you failed to maintain 
absolute integrity and devotion to duty and thereby you exhibited the 
conduct  unbecoming  of  a  Government  Servant  and  violated  the 
provision  of  Rule  20  of  the  Tamil  Nadu  Government  Servants' 
Conduct Rules, 1973.''
2.
Not being satisfied with the explanation rendered by the petitioner, 
he was subjected to an enquiry.  On conclusion of the enquiry, while the first 
charge was held as not proved, charges 2 and 3 were held as proved through the 
report of the enquiry officer dated 13.12.2021.  The copy of the enquiry report 
was  furnished  to  the  petitioner,  to  which  he  had  rendered  his  further 
explanation on 07.01.2022.  Rejecting the objections raised therein, the 1st 
Page No.3 of 12


…