Guv’s secy summoned for contempt of court
Directed To Appear Before HC on Mar 19
Sureshkumar.K@timesgroup.com
Chennai:22.02.2019
R Rajagopal, senior bureaucrat and secretary to Tamil Nadu governor, is staring at contempt of court proceedings for his failure to implement a five-yearold Supreme Court order quashing ‘involuntary’ repatriation of a Raj Bhavan employee to his parent department.
The Madras high court summoned the officer to be personally present before a bench of Justice S Manikumar and Justice M Venugopal on March 19. Suspecting wilful disobedience of court orders, the bench has asked the officer to appear and explain why contempt of court proceedings should not be initiated against him.
The bench passed the order while noting that though contempt was committed by his predecessor, it could be extended against the present officer who holds the post and has the knowledge of such contempt.
The matter relates to a case filed by S Nagaraj, an assistant section officer of the governor’s secretariat, challenging an order dated November 25, 1996, by the then secretary transferring him back to the department of animal husbandry.
After joining the department as a stenotypist on August 1, 1983, Nagaraj’s service was regularised in 1986. He was transferred to the governor’s secretariat and appointed as acting assistant on January 20, 1988.
Subsequently, he was promoted as personal clerk to deputy secretary to the governor and was also provided quarters on the vast Raj Bhavan campus.
On October 4, 1996, Nagaraj wrote to the then governor’s secretary to consider him for promotion to the post of private secretary or to upgrade his post as section officer. The then governor also made a note of endorsement on the representation. But, for reasons best known to the official concerned, within four days of sending the representation, Nagaraj was reverted to his parent department.
Assailing the order, Nagaraj moved the administrative tribunal. On January 24, 1997, the tribunal granted an interim stay against the transfer. Challenging the stay, the governor’s office moved the high court. On September 30, 2009, the high court dismissed the plea noting that once a person was regularly appointed to a post, in accordance with existing rules and in the absence of anything contrary to the rules, they cannot be involuntarily repatriated to their parent department.
A division bench for the court also confirmed the order on appeal. Aggrieved, the governor’s office moved the Supreme Court. On October 25, 2013 the apex court also confirmed the high court order and dismissed the appeal. Since the governor’s office had failed to implement the court order even after expiry to five years, Nagaraj moved the present contempt petition.
R Rajagopal, senior bureaucrat and secretary to Tamil Nadu governor, has been asked to appear before court and explain why contempt of court proceedings should not be initiated against him
Directed To Appear Before HC on Mar 19
Sureshkumar.K@timesgroup.com
Chennai:22.02.2019
R Rajagopal, senior bureaucrat and secretary to Tamil Nadu governor, is staring at contempt of court proceedings for his failure to implement a five-yearold Supreme Court order quashing ‘involuntary’ repatriation of a Raj Bhavan employee to his parent department.
The Madras high court summoned the officer to be personally present before a bench of Justice S Manikumar and Justice M Venugopal on March 19. Suspecting wilful disobedience of court orders, the bench has asked the officer to appear and explain why contempt of court proceedings should not be initiated against him.
The bench passed the order while noting that though contempt was committed by his predecessor, it could be extended against the present officer who holds the post and has the knowledge of such contempt.
The matter relates to a case filed by S Nagaraj, an assistant section officer of the governor’s secretariat, challenging an order dated November 25, 1996, by the then secretary transferring him back to the department of animal husbandry.
After joining the department as a stenotypist on August 1, 1983, Nagaraj’s service was regularised in 1986. He was transferred to the governor’s secretariat and appointed as acting assistant on January 20, 1988.
Subsequently, he was promoted as personal clerk to deputy secretary to the governor and was also provided quarters on the vast Raj Bhavan campus.
On October 4, 1996, Nagaraj wrote to the then governor’s secretary to consider him for promotion to the post of private secretary or to upgrade his post as section officer. The then governor also made a note of endorsement on the representation. But, for reasons best known to the official concerned, within four days of sending the representation, Nagaraj was reverted to his parent department.
Assailing the order, Nagaraj moved the administrative tribunal. On January 24, 1997, the tribunal granted an interim stay against the transfer. Challenging the stay, the governor’s office moved the high court. On September 30, 2009, the high court dismissed the plea noting that once a person was regularly appointed to a post, in accordance with existing rules and in the absence of anything contrary to the rules, they cannot be involuntarily repatriated to their parent department.
A division bench for the court also confirmed the order on appeal. Aggrieved, the governor’s office moved the Supreme Court. On October 25, 2013 the apex court also confirmed the high court order and dismissed the appeal. Since the governor’s office had failed to implement the court order even after expiry to five years, Nagaraj moved the present contempt petition.
R Rajagopal, senior bureaucrat and secretary to Tamil Nadu governor, has been asked to appear before court and explain why contempt of court proceedings should not be initiated against him
No comments:
Post a Comment