Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2010 DIGILAW 3754 (MAD)

V. M. Karmegam v. Chief Conservator of Forests

2010-08-25

T.RAJA

body2010
Judgment :- 1. The petitioner had approached the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, by filing Original Application No.3653 of 2000, with a prayer call for the records of the 1st respondent in Proc.Rc.No.AB3/12554/90, dated 05.02.2000 and that of the 2nd respondent in Pro.No.B2/10351/97(4), dated 28.10.97 and quash the same with all consequential benefits. 2. The petitioner, V.M.Karmegam, while serving as a Forest Watcher in Mannavanur Range, from 03.05.96 to 14.06.97, suffered a disciplinary proceedings, for which a charge memo issued containing two charges of neglect of duty in having failed to prevent illicit cutting in Reserve Forest area in kavunji Beat of Mannavanur Range and causing loss to the Government to the tune of Rs.33771/-by not preventing illicit removal. Immediately after the receipt of the charge memo issued under Rule 17(a) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules by the District Forest Officer, Kodaikanal Division, the petitioner has submitted his detailed explanations denying all the charges. The stand taken by the petitioner in the said explanations was that the alleged irregularities had taken place prior to his joining duty at Kavunji Bean on 03.05.96 and therefore, the allegation of felling of trees were assessed by the Special Party with a report saying that the above said felling have taken place during the period of 3 to 4 months as on 13.08.96, cannot be made against the petitioner. In his further explanations, it was contended that the felling of 760 nos. of wattle trees would not have occurred within 10 days, which is prior to his joining the post. Further, the disciplinary authority, having not satisfied with the explanations offered by the petitioner, imposed the punishment of stoppage of increment for three years without cumulative effect. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent/Chief Conservator of Forests(Planning and Development), Chennai, who has, after considering the case of the petitioner, by interfering with the above said punishment, modified the said punishment of stoppage of increment for three years into one of stoppage of increment for one year without cumulative effect. As against that, the present OA came to be filed and on abolition of the Tribunal, the same was transferred on the file of this Court and renumbered as W.P.No.48107 of 2006. 3. As against that, the present OA came to be filed and on abolition of the Tribunal, the same was transferred on the file of this Court and renumbered as W.P.No.48107 of 2006. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the charges framed against the petitioner was based on the inspection made by the special team, who has submitted a separate report, stating that the illicit felling had occurred between three to four months as of 13.08.96, goes to show that the petitioner was not responsible for the above said allegation, since he has joined the duty as Forest Watcher only on 03.05.96. The incident took place during the time when he was not working as a Forest Officer, hence, it was contended that the above said allegation cannot be put against the petitioner. On that basis, prayed for setting aside the impugned order. 4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the illicit removal of wood, bark and reject wood in Kavunji Beat of Mannavanur Range was brought to the notice of the District Forest Officer, Kodaikanal, at the time of his field inspection. Pursuant to the complaint, a Special Party was formed to list out the irregularities noticed in this place and the Special Party, after visiting the area, listed out illicit felling of 760 nos. of wattle trees and also reported that the cut materials obtained from these trees had been removed illegally. The said illicit felling occurred during the period of 3 months to 4 months as per the report of the Special Party. Due to the illegal felling of 760 nos. of wattle trees and removal of the cut materials from these trees, huge loss had occurred to the Government and the said loss was assessed at Rs.33,771/-. In that view of the matter, since the petitioner was the incharge of the area, in which he was posted, he was issued with a charge memo under Rule 17(a) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. The disciplinary authority, having not satisfied with the explanations offered by the petitioner, imposed the punishment of stoppage of increment for three years without cumulative effect. Subsequently, the punishment was altered into one of stoppage of increment for 1 year without cumulative effect. The disciplinary authority, having not satisfied with the explanations offered by the petitioner, imposed the punishment of stoppage of increment for three years without cumulative effect. Subsequently, the punishment was altered into one of stoppage of increment for 1 year without cumulative effect. Therefore, since the original punishment having been subsequently modified, this Court need not to interfere with the punishment imposed against the petitioner and on that basis, prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 5. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record. 6. Since the illicit felling of trees, removal of wood, bark and reject wood were brought to the notice of the District Forest Officer, Kodaikanal at the time of his field inspection, even without taking any decision on the complaint, a Special Party was formed to list out the irregularities noticed in this area. The Special Party visited the entire area including the place where the petitioner was posted as Forest Watcher. The said Special Party listed out illicit felling of 760 nos. of wattle trees and also reported that the cut materials obtained from these trees had been removed illegally. The illicit felling occurred during the period of 3 months to 4 months as per the report of the Special Party i.e., from 13.08.96. Therefore, the contention made by the petitioner that he was not present, when the illicit cutting took place, cannot be accepted. The Special Party in yet another report, categorically mentioned that the illicit felling occurred during 3 months to 4 months as on 13.08.96, which is well within the time the petitioner joined duty on 03.05.96. In that view of the matter, the disciplinary authority finding him guilty on the charges levelled against the petitioner, imposed the punishment of stoppage of increment for 3 years without cumulative effect. Aggrieved by the said punishment, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent and the 1st respondent, being an Appellate Authority, reduced the punishment into one of stoppage of increment for one year without cumulative effect. When the disciplinary authority came to a clear cut findings that there was a illegal felling of 760 nos. Aggrieved by the said punishment, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 1st respondent and the 1st respondent, being an Appellate Authority, reduced the punishment into one of stoppage of increment for one year without cumulative effect. When the disciplinary authority came to a clear cut findings that there was a illegal felling of 760 nos. of wattle trees and the removal of the cut materials, which were said to have occurred, when the petitioner was on duty, therefore, the same cannot be said to be unreasonable or disproportionate to the proved charges levelled against the petitioner. In that view of the matter, this Court, for the reasons stated above, is not inclined to interfere with the punishment imposed against the petitioner and accordingly, the present writ petition is liable to be dismissed and the same is therefore dismissed. No Costs.