High Court finds something wrong with Tasmac
Taking into account that complaints regarding a District Manager and a Supervisor of Tasmac allegedly collecting bribes from its outlets in Madurai district had not been addressed properly, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court observed that there was something wrong with the Corporation.
The court was hearing the petitions filed in 2022 by K. Mayakannan, S. Murugan and V. Ramasamy, who were salesmen in Tasmac shops. The case of the petitioners was that the then District Manager of Tasmac, Madurai South, Rajeswari, colluded with the then Supervisor of Tasmac, Tirumangalam, Selvam, and collected bribes every month from the shops under her control. There were also other allegations against Rajeswari.
The petitioners lodged a complaint with the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption, which was forwarded to Tasmac authorities. An inquiry was ordered. The petitioners also submitted their representations.
Since, the grievances of the petitioners were not addressed, they gave an interview to the media. They were suspended by the management on the grounds that their conduct was against the Employees Code of Conduct circular. Challenging the order, the petitions were filed.
Justice B. Pugalendhi observed that the petitioners lodged a complaint, along with the recording of a conversation between Rajeswari and Selvam. The authorities conducted an inquiry and closed it stating that the corruption charges were without any materials and that the alleged conversation in the phone was denied by Supervisor Selvam.
The person against whom allegations were made was transferred to the parent department and it was reported that she had retired from service. However, the petitioners' complaint had been closed by recording the statement of Selvam that he was not part of the conversation. The available materials showed that there was something wrong in the government-run Corporation. The governemnt should not allow corruption in its funstioning. The corporation had to realise its mistake, the court observed.
Considering the manner in which the issue was handled, the court set aside the suspension orders with liberty to the Corporation to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the petitioners for violating the circular.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Indian Express
7 hours ago
- New Indian Express
TNEB told to pay Rs 10 lakh in damages to electrocution victim and son
MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court recently ordered the Dindigul division of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TNEB) to pay Rs 10 lakh compensation to a woman, whose husband and son died due to electrocution in Kodaikanal in 2018. Justice V Lakshminarayan passed the order on a petition filed in 2022 by the woman, R Subbulakshmi. According to the order, on December 2, 2018, the petitioner's son Raja Pandi got electrocuted when he went to dry a towel on a clothesline at their house, unaware that a live electric wire had fallen on it. Her husband, Ravi, in an attempt to save his son, also met the same fate. Subbulakshmi claimed that for 10 days prior to the incident, there had been no power supply to her house owing to Gaja cyclone. Authorities had restored the connection without checking whether the electric lines were intact, she alleged. Saying that she had lost her husband and only son due to the negligence of the authorities, she sought compensation. Pointing out a Tangedco scheme providing Rs 5 lakh solatium to the family of electrocution victims, the judge ordered the superintending engineer (Dindigul) to pay Rs 10 lakh.
Hans India
a day ago
- Hans India
SC discharges hostel in-charge of abetting student's suicide
The Supreme Court has discharged a Tamil Nadu school hostel in-charge, who was accused of abetting a student's suicide. A bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Prashant Kumar Mishra was dealing with an appeal challenging a decision of the Madras High Court, which had rejected the prayer to discharge the appellant for the offence of abetment to suicide under the Indian Penal Code's Section 306. The appellant's counsel contended before the apex court that the appellant had scolded the deceased, due to which the latter had locked himself in a room and hanged himself with a nylon rope. It was argued that the response of the appellant, being the correspondent and in charge of running a school and hostel, was justified, and it was just a chiding as a guardian to ensure that the deceased did not repeat the offence, and there was peace and tranquillity in the hostel. It was further submitted that there was nothing personal between the appellant and the deceased, and such reprimanding was meted out to the deceased only on a complaint by another student. The appellant was accused in an FIR registered by the state police CB-CID for the offences punishable under Sections 306 IPC (abetment to suicide) and 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, charges were framed against him under Section 306. Before the apex court, the counsel representing the Tamil Nadu government "fairly" stated that there did not appear to be any valid ground for charging the appellant for abetment to suicide. In its order, the Supreme Court noted that despite valid service of notice, the complainant, the father of the deceased student, did not appear in the proceedings before the top court. "Having considered the matter in its entirety, we find it a fit case for interference. As has rightly been submitted by learned senior counsel for the appellant, no normal person could have imagined that a scolding, that too based on a complaint by a student, would result in such tragedy due to the student so scolded taking his own life," it said. The apex court added that such scolding was the least a correspondent was required to do, to ensure that the complaint made against the deceased by another student was taken note of and remedial measures effected. After considering the factual position, the top court, in its considered opinion, found that no mens rea can be attributed to the appellant with regard to the abetment of suicide committed by the deceased. Allowing the appeal, it directed that "the order framing charge against the appellant under Section 306 of the IPC in connection with FIR No.01/2024 registered by CBCID stands set aside. The appellant stands discharged in the said case".
The Hindu
a day ago
- The Hindu
Scolding does not amount to provoking someone to take own life: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has discharged a man who was accused of driving a student to suicide by scolding him. The accused, in charge of a school and a hostel, had scolded the deceased following a complaint by another student. After the incident, the student killed himself. A Bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Prashant Kumar Mishra stated that no ordinary person could have imagined that a scolding would result in such a tragedy. The top court set aside an order of the Madras High Court, which had refused to discharge the teacher for the offence of abetment to suicide under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. "Having considered the matter in its entirety, we find it a fit case for interference. As has rightly been submitted by the appellant, no normal person could have imagined that a scolding, that too based on a complaint by a student, would result in such a tragedy due to the student so scolded taking his own life," the bench said. The apex court said such scolding was the least to ensure that the complaint made against the deceased by another student was taken note of and remedial measures were effected. "In the considered opinion of this court, under such admitted factual position, no mens rea (knowledge of wrongdoing) can be attributed to the appellant, much less, with regard to abatement of suicide committed by the deceased," the bench said. The man, through his lawyer, had submitted that his response was justified and was merely a chiding as a guardian to ensure that the deceased did not repeat the offence, and to maintain peace and tranquillity in the hostel. He had submitted that there was nothing personal between him and the deceased. [Assistance for overcoming suicidal thoughts is available on the State's health helpline 104, Tele-MANAS 14416 and SNEHA's suicide prevention helpline - 044 24640050 or from any of the numbers in this link]
