K.S. MANI vs THE BOARD
- Court
- Madras High Court
WA No. 2434 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Reserved on : 30-07-2026
Pronounced on : 09-09-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR
WA No. 2434 of 2023
K.S.Mani
..Appellant
Vs
1. The Board,
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution
Corporation Ltd.,
Rep. by its Secretary (A/c)
Secretariat, 144, Anna Salai,
Chennai -600 002.
2. The Chairman and Managing Director,
Tamil Nadu General and Distribution
Corporation Ltd.,
Secretariat, 144, Anna Salai,
Chenani 600 002.
..Respondents
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, seeking to set
aside the order of the learned Judge, dated 06.11.2020 passed in WP No.15730
of 2013 and allow the Writ Appeal.
For Appellant : Ms.D.Geetha
For Respondents: Mr.K.Raj Kumar,
Standing Counsel for TANGEDCO
for R1 & R2
Page 1 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 07:44:10 pm )
WA No. 2434 of 2023
Judgment
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by N.Senthilkumar J.)
The present intra Court Appeal is filed challenging the order passed in
WP No.15730 of 2013, dated 06.11.2020.
2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:
The writ petitioner who is the appellant herein had joined as Assistant
Engineer in Tamil Nadu Electricity Board [now renamed as Tamil Nadu
Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (TANGEDCO)] on
20.10.1976 and he was promoted to various levels and had reached the post of
Executive Engineer, during which disciplinary proceedings were initiated in
accordance with Regulation 8(b) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board
Employee’s Discipline and Appeal Regulations. Hence, the appellant was not
permitted to retire on attaining the age of Superannuation on 30.04.2006.
Subsequently, a Charge Memo in Memorandum No.31516/A5/A52/2006-21,
dated 12.05.2008 has been issued on the appellant, which contains the following
three charges:
CHARGE-I:
That Thiru K.S.Mani, then Executive Engineer/Operation/ 230
KVSS/ Shenbagaramanapudur (now under suspension) has
acquired movable and immovable properties in his name and in
the name of his family members during the period between
23.12.1998 and 29.7.2004 to the tune of Rs. 10,74,863/- which are
Page 2 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 07:44:10 pm )
WA No. 2434 of 2023
disproportionate to his known sources of income.
CHARGE-II:
That Thiru K.S.Mani, Executive Engineer/ Operation/230 KVSS/
Shenbagaramanpudur has failed to obtain the previous sanction of
the prescribed authority to permit his son Thiru S.M.Kannan to
accept gift in the form of house sites and houses and thereby
violated the provisions laid down under regulation 9(1) of the
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Employees' Conduct Regulations.
CHARGE-III:
That Thiru K.S.Mani, Executive Engineer/ Operation/230 KVSS/
Shenbagaramanpudur has failed to bring to the notice of the
prescribed authority in acquiring the movable and immovable
properties during the year 2002, thereby violated the provisions
laid down under regulation 13(1) and 13(2) of the Tamil Nadu
Electricity Board Employees' Conduct Regulations.
3. On perusal of the above charges, it reveals that the charges have been
framed on the ground that the movable and immovable properties stood in the
name of the appellant and his family members during the period between
23.12.1998 and 29.7.2004 to the tune of Rs.10,74,863/-, which are
disproportionate to his known sources of income and without obtaining the
previous sanction of the prescribed authority, his son had accepted the gift in the
form of house sites and houses which is in contravention to the provisions laid
down under regulation 9(1) of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Employees'
Conduct Regulations and the details of movable and immovable properties are
Page 3 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 07:44:10 pm )
WA No. 2434 of 2023
not brought to the notice of the prescribed authority during the year 2002 which
is also a violation of the provisions laid down under regulation 13(1) and 13(2)
of the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Employees' Conduct Regulations.
4. In this regard, the appellant was issued with a show cause notice
calling for an explanation to which the appellant had submitted his explanation.
Being not satisfied with the explanation, the respondent, appointed an enquiry
officer and an enquiry was conducted by examining the witnesses and the
documents relied on by the prosecution. The enquiry report was furnished to
the appellant and the show cause notice was issued calling for further
explanation. The appellant had given his explanation. Thereafter, the enquiry
nd
officer submitted his report, based on which, the 2 respondent has passed an
order of removal from service, vide (Permanent) CMD TANGEDCO
Proceedings No.29, order dated 19.02.2011.
5. It is also alleged that, apart from the above charge memo, dated
12.05.2008, the respondent had earlier issued a charge memo dated 05.03.2005,
framing two charges against the appellant with regard to the properties
purchased without prior intimation to the respondent / Department. However,
the charges were dropped upon acceptance of the explanation submitted by the
petitioner.
Page 4 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 07:44:10 pm )
WA No. 2434 of 2023
6. The appellant had preferred an appeal before the first respondent on
nd
23.03.2011 against the order of the 2 respondent, dated 19.02.2011 whereby
he was removed from service. However, the same came to be rejected on
28.09.2011. The appellant had challenged the rejection of appeal in
nd
W.P.No.26572 of 2011 before this Court and sought a direction to the 2
respondent to permit him to retire from service with effect from 30.04.2006.
This Court by an order dated 04.02.2013, set aside the order of removal of the
st
petitioner from service, dated 19.02.2011 and remitted the matter back to the 1
respondent for fresh consideration of the appeal on merits and to pass speaking
order.
st
7. Pursuant to the said order, the 1 respondent / Board had once again
rejected the appeal vide order dated 20.05.2013, taking into consideration the
representation submitted by the appellant, against which he has filed the writ
petition which is impugned in this order.
8. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials
available on record.
9. Before going into the merits of the case, let us examine the scope of
Regulation 8(b) of Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Employees’ Discipline and
Page 5 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 07:44:10 pm )
WA No. 2434 of 2023
Appeal Regulations. The said Regulation is extracted hereunder:
8. Procedure for imposing Penalties:
“(a).....
(b) (i) In every case where it is proposed to impose on an
employee any of the penalties in items (iii), (v), (vi) and (vii) in
regulation 5, he shall be given a charge sheet setting forth the
grounds on which it is proposed to take action and any other
circumstances which it is proposed to take into consideration in
passing orders on the case. He shall be required to answer the
charge or charges in a written statement within a reasonable time
not exceeding one month and also to state whether he desires an
oral enquiry or to be heard in person or both. An oral enquiry
shall be held if the employee desires such inquiry, or if so directed
by the authority concerned. Even if a person charged has waived
an oral inquiry, such inquiry shall be held by the authority
concerned in respect of charges which are not admitted by the
person charged and which can be proved only through the
evidence of witnesses. At that inquiry, oral evidence shall be
heard as to such of those allegations as are not admitted The
employee shall be permitted to produce witness in his defence and
cross examine any witness on whose evidence the charge rests.
The officer conducting the inquiry may, for special and sufficient
reasons to be recorded in writing, refuse to call a witness. The
enquiring officer shall ask, in writing the delinquent employee
immediately after the enquiry is over, whether he had a
reasonable opportunity of presenting his case or if he has any
complaint in this regard. If there is any complaint in this regard,
the enquiring officer will examine the complaints and set right the
Page 6 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 07:44:10 pm )
WA No. 2434 of 2023
matter. If it is considered that the alleged denial of reasonable
opportunity is made with a view to delay the disciplinary
proceedings, the enquiring officer will be competent to ignore the
complaint and the reasons for not complying with the request
should be recorded. After the inquiry has been completed, the
person charged shall be entitled to put in, if he so desires, a
further written statement of his defence, whether or not the person
charged desired or had an oral enquiry, he shall be heard in
person at any stage if he so desires before passing of final orders.
A report of the enquiry or personal hearing (as the case may be)
shall be prepared by the authority holding the enquiry or personal
hearing whether or not such authority is competent to impose the
penalty. Such report shall contain a sufficient record of the
evidence, if any, and a statement of the findings and the grounds
thereof.
“Provided that the Board employee may take the assistance
of any retired Board employee to present the case on his behalf
but may not engage a legal practitioner for the purpose unless the
inquiring authority is a legal practitioner or the inquiring
authority, having regard to the circumstances of the case, so
permit.
Explanation. The Board employee shall not take the
assistance of any retired Board employee who has two pending
1
disciplinary cases on hand, in which he has to give assistance;”
(ii) If the Board employee to whom a copy of the charges
together with a statement of the allegation on which each charge
is based and of any other circumstances which it is proposed to
take into consideration in passing orders on the case, is
1
Substituted – vide (P) B.P.(FB) No.41 (SB), dt.16.10.2007.
Page 7 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 07:44:10 pm )
WA No. 2434 of 2023
communicated, does not submit the written statement of his
defence on or before the date specified for the purpose or does not
appear in person before the inquiring authority or otherwise fails
or refuses to comply with the provisions of this regulation, the
inquiring authority may hold the inquiry exparte.
(iii) After the enquiry or personal hearing referred to in this
clause has been completed, and if the authority competent to
impose the penalty is of the opinion, on the basis of the evidence
adduced during the inquiry, that any of the penalties specified in
Regulation 5 should be imposed on the person charged, it shall
before making an order imposing such penalty furnish to him a
copy of the report of the inquiry or personal hearing or both as
the case may be, and call upon him to submit his further
representation, if any. within a reasonable time, not exceeding
fifteen days. Any representation received in this behalf within the
period shall be taken into consideration before making any order
imposing the penalty provided that such representation shall be
based on the evidence adduced during the inquiry only. It shall
not be necessary to give the person charged any opportunity of
making representation on the penalty proposed to be imposed.”
10. The enquiry report produced reveals that all the charges were proved
with clear findings, after taking into consideration the explanation given by the
appellant herein and the documents furnished in support of the contention raised
on behalf of the appellant.
11. Though it is the specific stand of the appellant that there is no material
Page 8 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 07:44:10 pm )
WA No. 2434 of 2023
to prove the charges as levelled against him, the documents which were
produced by the prosecution to show that the appellant’s income is
disproportionate to the known source of income for the properties, which stands
in his name and his family members, was not disproved.
12. When the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Employee’s Discipline and
Appeal Regulations contemplates that an enquiry officer has authority to
conduct enquiry and to pass final orders notwithstanding to make his
nd
recommendation based on which the 2 respondent has taken a decision to
impose punishment of removal from service, the appellant cannot take a stand
that fair opportunity was not afforded to him, since the appellant himself has
taken part in the enquiry. However, he failed to produce documents to
substantiate his case and the Enquiry Officer has dealt with the allegation raised
by the authority and the defence taken and made a recommendation for removal
of the petitioner from service. The Writ Court has considered the above and in
paragraphs 46 to 49, it was held as under:
“46. Though such a stand is taken by the petitioner,
however, it is the stand of the respondents, as is revealed through
the enquiry report that no documentary materials have been
placed by the petitioner to prove the source of income for the
purchase of the movable and immovable properties by the
petitioner's wife and son. Mere assertion on the part of the
petitioner cannot partake the character of proof to come to the
conclusion that the wife and son of the petitioner had individual
income from their own sources to purchase the properties in their
names. The transactions between the wife of the petitioner and
Page 9 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 07:44:10 pm )
WA No. 2434 of 2023
his brother with regard to receipt of amounts that is a direct off-
shoot from the family properties should be proved by materials
and accepting any oral statement as to the same without there
being documentary proof would not only be too large an ask at
the hands of this Court, but would be against the requirement of
evidence, which is a necessity to prove the innocence of the
petitioner, more so in a case involving disciplinary action under
the corruption laws. Further, as already held, the rental income
derived from the ancestral properties of the petitioner, the share
of which has been given to the wife of the petitioner, would not
make the said amount as income at the hands of the petitioner’s
wife.
47. In this regard, Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act is
being pressed into service by the learned standing counsel for the
respondents, who vehemently contended that the burden lies on
the petitioner to prove the fact, which is especially within his
knowledge. It is the stand of the respondents that the source of
income of the petitioner's wife and son being within the exclusive
knowledge of the petitioner, the petitioner was required to prove
the same through requisite documentary evidence relating to the
transactions, in which monetary aspect is involved.
48. It is the consistent stand of the petitioner that his wife
and son were having independent sources of income from which
the properties have been purchased by them. Merely making an
assertion that they were having income of their own would not
suffice to prove the case of the petitioner as to the independent
source of income of his wife and son. The petitioner is bound to
place documentary proof regarding receipt of income, as the said
receipts relating to their income was exclusively within the
knowledge of the petitioner.
49. Further, it is also evident from the records that though
the petitioner has examined D.W.1 and D.W.2, viz., his brother
and friend to prove about the payments made to his wife, however,
even thereto, the evidence is merely oral and there are no
Page 10 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 07:44:10 pm )
WA No. 2434 of 2023
documents placed to prove that the petitioner's wife was the
recipient of amounts from D.W.s 1 and 2 towards receipt of rental
income from the ancestral properties of the petitioner as also the
return of the loan availed by D.W.2. Mere oral evidence cannot
partake the place of documentary evidence, when in certain
phases of the matter, the documentary evidence would have more
weightage than the oral evidence. Particularly in cases of this
nature, where the source of income is an issue, documentary
evidence takes precedence over oral evidence and oral evidence,
if at all, is only supplementary. Therefore, in the absence of any
tangible and credible documentary evidence supporting the stand
of the petitioner, the conclusion arrived at by the enquiry officer
cannot be found fault with.”
13. There is a clear distinction with regard to the domestic enquiry. The
law is well settled that the preponderance of probabilities are sufficient to
impose punishment on the delinquent based on the charges levelled against him.
14. The High Court in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, has to examine whether enquiry was conducted or
whether the opportunity was given to the appellant.
15. Admittedly, the appellant has taken part in the enquiry and has failed
to submit his defence by way of marking his documents, however, he himself
participated in the domestic/oral enquiry and therefore, the claim that no fair
opportunity was given to the appellant itself disproved through the findings of
the enquiry report.
Page 11 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 07:44:10 pm )
WA No. 2434 of 2023
16. With regard to the scope of judicial review, the High Court cannot sit
and review the entire proceedings which were conducted by the enquiry officer.
The enquiry report clearly reveals that no documents were produced by the
appellant during the enquiry. In absence of such documentary evidence, the
Enquiry Officer considered the oral enquiry in detail and arrived at a
conclusion. Thereafter, the disciplinary authority passed an order of removal
from service after affording an opportunity to the appellant.
17. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Karnataka and
Anr. vs. Umesh reported in (2022) 6 SCC 563 had held as under:
21.The Court also held that :
(C.Nagaraju case SCC p372, para 13)
“13. Having considered the submissions
made on behalf of the Appellant and the
Respondent No.1, we are of the view that
interference with the order of dismissal by the High
Court was unwarranted. It is settled law that the
acquittal by a Criminal Court does not preclude a
Departmental Inquiry against the delinquent
officer. The disciplinary authority is not bound by
the judgment of the Criminal Court if the evidence
that is produced in the Departmental Inquiry is
different from that produced during the criminal
trial. The object of a Departmental Inquiry is to
find out whether the delinquent is guilty of
misconduct under the conduct rules for the purpose
of determining whether he should be continued in
service. The standard of proof in a Departmental
Page 12 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 07:44:10 pm )
WA No. 2434 of 2023
Inquiry is not strictly based on the rules of
evidence. The order of dismissal which is based on
the evidence before the Inquiry Officer in the
disciplinary proceedings, which is different from
the evidence available to the Criminal Court, is
justified and needed no interference by the High
Court."
22. In the exercise of judicial review, the Court does not
act as an appellate forum over the findings of the disciplinary
authority. The court does not re-appreciate the evidence on the
basis of which the finding of misconduct has been arrived at in
the course of a disciplinary enquiry. The Court in the exercise
of judicial review must restrict its review to determine whether:
(i) the rules of natural justice have been complied with;
(ii) the finding of misconduct is based on some evidence;
(iii) the statutory rules governing the conduct of the
disciplinary enquiry have been observed; and
(iv) whether the findings of the disciplinary authority
suffer from perversity; and
(vi) the penalty is disproportionate to the proven
misconduct.
18. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in yet another case in Chatrapal Vs.
State of Uttar Pradesh and anr. reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 146 had held
as under:
17. In P. Gunasekaran (supra), the following has been held by this
Court in para nos. 12, 13..:
“ 12. Despite the well-settled position, it is painfully
disturbing to note that the High Court has acted as an
appellate authority in the disciplinary proceedings,
reappreciating even the evidence before the enquiry
officer. The finding on Charge I was accepted by the
disciplinary authority and was also endorsed by the
Central Administrative Tribunal. In disciplinary
Page 13 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 07:44:10 pm )
WA No. 2434 of 2023
proceedings, the High Court is not and cannot act as a
second court of first appeal. The High Court, in exercise
of its powers under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution
of India, shall not venture into reappreciation of the
evidence. The High Court can only see whether:
(a) the enquiry is held by a competent authority;
(b) the enquiry is held according to the procedure
prescribed in that behalf;
(c) there is violation of the principles of natural justice
in conducting the proceedings;
(d) the authorities have disabled themselves from
reaching a fair conclusion by some considerations
extraneous to the evidence and merits of the case;
(e) the authorities have allowed themselves to be
influenced by irrelevant or extraneous considerations;
(f) the conclusion, on the very face of it, is so wholly
arbitrary and capricious that no reasonable person
could ever have arrived at such conclusion;
(g) the disciplinary authority had erroneously failed to
admit the admissible and material evidence;
(h) the disciplinary authority had erroneously admitted
inadmissible evidence which influenced the finding;
(i) the finding of fact is based on no evidence.
13. Under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India,
the High Court shall not:
(i) reappreciate the evidence;
(ii) interfere with the conclusions in the enquiry, in case
the same has been conducted in accordance with law;
Page 14 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 07:44:10 pm )
WA No. 2434 of 2023
(iii) go into the adequacy of the evidence;
(iv) go into the reliability of the evidence;
(v) interfere, if there be some legal evidence on which
findings can be based.
(vi) correct the error of fact however grave it may
appear to be;
(vii) go into the proportionality of punishment unless it
shocks its conscience.
19. In the above case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had categorically stated
that the scope of judicial review in respect of punishment imposed by the
disciplinary authority is very limited. High Court cannot exercise its
extraordinary jurisdiction to take a different view than that of views taken by
Disciplinary Authority and Appellate Authority, unless the proportionality of
punishment shocks the conscience of the Court.
20. In the present case on hand, all these factors have been considered by
the Enquiry Officer, which was confirmed by the disciplinary authority by its
detailed order. The Writ Court has examined all these parameters and had
dismissed the writ petition. We, therefore, find no infirmity in the order passed
by the learned single Judge in confirming the order of the disciplinary authority.
Page 15 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 07:44:10 pm )
WA No. 2434 of 2023
21. In the result, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. No costs.
(S.M.S.,J.) (N.S.,J.)
09-09-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
vum
To
1. The Secretary (A/c),
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution
Corporation Ltd.,
Secretariat, 144, Anna Salai,
Chennai 2.
2. The Chairman and Managing Director
Tamil Nadu General and Distribution
Corporation Ltd.,
Secretariat, 144, Anna Salai,
Chenani 2.
Page 16 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 07:44:10 pm )
WA No. 2434 of 2023
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J.
AND
N.SENTHILKUMAR J.
vum
Pre-delivery Judgment in
WA No. 2434 of 2023
09-09-2026
Page 17 of 17
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 09/09/2026 07:44:10 pm )