Madras High Court
James Irudayaraj vs Union Of India on 14 December, 2022
Author: M.Dhandapani
Bench: M.Dhandapani
W.P.(MD) No.28277 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 14.12.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P.(MD) No.28277 of 2022
and WMP(MD) No.22331 of 2022
James Irudayaraj ... Petitioner
-vs-
1.Union of India
Rep. By Chairman and Managing Director,
NPCIL, Nabhikiya Urja Bhavan
Anaushakti Nagar
Mumbai 400094
2.The Site Director,
Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited,
Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project,
Kudankulam Post Radhapuram Taluk
Tirunelveli District.
3.The Station Director,
Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited,
Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project,
Kudankulam Post Radhapuram Taluk
Tirunelveli District.
_________
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.28277 of 2022
4.Sri Aditya Krishna Yannam @ Sri Aditya Scientific Officer E
Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited,
Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project,
Kudankulam Post Radhapuram Taluk
Tirunelveli District. ... Respondents
Prayer:- Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying
for issuance of Writ of Certiorari to call for the records pertaining to charge
memo dated 03.10.2022 bearing Ref. No.NPCIL/KKNOO / HR-
DC/2022/S/212 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Ms.V.Muthumani
For Respondents : Mr.V.Malaiyendran
Central Government Standing
counsel for R1 to R3
ORDER
Challenging the charge memo dated 03.10.2022 of the third respondent, the petitioner is before this Court with this writ petition.
2. Since no adverse order is passed against the fourth respondent, notice to the fourth respondent is dispensed with. _________ Page 2 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.28277 of 2022
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that due to private dispute between the petitioner and the 4th respondent, the matter went before the law enforcing agency and the matter was subsequently compromised. Thereafter, the petitioner was issued with a charge memo dated 03.10.2022. Pursuant to the issuance of the charge memo, the petitioner submitted his detailed reply to the third respondent on 23.11.2022. Since no order was passed on the said reply, the petitioner is before this Court challenging the impugned charge memo.
4. The learned Central Government Standing counsel, who takes notice on behalf of the respondents, would submit that enquiry will be conducted and orders would be passed.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Central Government Standing counsel for the respondents 1 to 3.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without going into the merits of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of with a _________ Page 3 of 5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD) No.28277 of 2022 direction to the third respondent to pass orders on the charge memo, after conducting a detailed enquiry and after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the fourth respondent, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
14.12.2022
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
RR
_________
Page 4 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD) No.28277 of 2022
M.DHANDAPANI, J.
RR
W.P.(MD) No.28277 of 2022
14.12.2022
_________
Page 5 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis