Dismissal of noon-meal staff for swindling stock upheld by HC
The Madras High Court has upheld the orders of the government dismissing a noon meal worker in Villupuram district from service.
Published: 17th August 2019 04:44 AM
Madras High Court
By Express News Service
CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has upheld the orders of the government dismissing a noon-meal worker in Villupuram district from service.
The petitioner C Masilamani, a noon meal organiser, was held responsible for the shortfall of 205 kg of rice, 19.5 kg of dal and 500 eggs out of 800, which are meant for supply to students. Since he did not defend his case effectively and had committed a serious misconduct, he was foisted with the order of dismissal, which has been confirmed by the appellate authority.
As the petitioner had involved in misappropriation, the disciplinary and appellate authority had rightly come to the conclusion that the charges were proved. The petitioner’s contention that the students had not been examined, itself, is an ample proof that there was an enquiry and therefore, the defence taken herein by him, that there was no enquiry at all, cannot be accepted.
“When there is a prima facie case made out and the authorities have rendered a finding of fact, in the considered opinion of this court, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed and the petitioner is not entitled to any relief,” judge said.
The Madras High Court has upheld the orders of the government dismissing a noon meal worker in Villupuram district from service.
Published: 17th August 2019 04:44 AM
Madras High Court
By Express News Service
CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has upheld the orders of the government dismissing a noon-meal worker in Villupuram district from service.
The petitioner C Masilamani, a noon meal organiser, was held responsible for the shortfall of 205 kg of rice, 19.5 kg of dal and 500 eggs out of 800, which are meant for supply to students. Since he did not defend his case effectively and had committed a serious misconduct, he was foisted with the order of dismissal, which has been confirmed by the appellate authority.
As the petitioner had involved in misappropriation, the disciplinary and appellate authority had rightly come to the conclusion that the charges were proved. The petitioner’s contention that the students had not been examined, itself, is an ample proof that there was an enquiry and therefore, the defence taken herein by him, that there was no enquiry at all, cannot be accepted.
“When there is a prima facie case made out and the authorities have rendered a finding of fact, in the considered opinion of this court, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed and the petitioner is not entitled to any relief,” judge said.
No comments:
Post a Comment