S. Murali vs The Secretary to Government

WA No. 3335 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 02-11-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE DR JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE E.MANOHARAN
WA No. 3335 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA012049332026}
S. Murali
..Appellant
Vs
1. The Secretary to Government
Commercial Taxes Department,
Government of Tamilnadu,
Fort St.George, Chennai – 600009.
2. The Principal Commissioner and Commissioner
of Commercial Taxes,
Commercial Taxes Department,
Government of Tamilnadu,
Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600009.
3. Joint Commissioner of Administration,
Commercial Taxes Department,
Ezhilagam, Chennai - 600009.
4. Deputy Commissioner,
PAPJAM Building,
Greams Road,
Chennai - 600008.
..Respondents
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, to set aside the
order in WP.No.21441 of 2026 by order dated 15.06.2026.
For Appellant: Mr.C.Venkatesan
For Respondents: Mr.S.Illamvaludhi
__________
Page 1 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 12:21:44 pm )

WA No. 3335 of 2026
Special Government Pleader
JUDGMENT
( Judgment of the Court was delivered by Dr.G.Jayachandran J. )
The petitioner herein was dismissed from service pursuant to disciplinary
proceedings initiated against him for tampering with a banker’s cheque for
Rs.30,000/- issued in favour of the Commercial Tax Officer, Guindy and
encashing it, thereby causing a loss of Rs.30,000/- to the Government
Exchequer.
2. The other charge against him concerned his attempt to commit a
similar misappropriation by tampering with a cheque issued in favour of the
department. He altered the instrument to make it appear as though the cheque
was drawn in favour of his sister, N.Gayathri. The petitioner stated that the
criminal prosecution initiated against him ended in an acquittal on appeal,
though the trial Court had originally convicted him.
3.
Arguing that the punishment of dismissal from service is liable to
be quashed. The petitioner filed the writ petition without resorting to the other
statutory remedy of an appeal. The writ petition was considered by the learned
Single Judge. After recording the fact that the contention of the petitioner that
he was not given an opportunity to participate in the enquiry proceedings is
absolutely false and contrary to the records and having found that he had
__________
Page 2 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 12:21:44 pm )

WA No. 3335 of 2026
tampered the banker’s cheque issued in favour of the department and
misappropriated the cheque amount, the learned Single Judge held that the
gravity of the offence warrants dismissal.
4. The order of dismissal was passed after giving him due
opportunity. The fact that the writ petitioner voluntarily abstained from the
enquiry proceedings will not enure to his benefit or allow him to take a plea of
violation of the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the writ petition has
been dismissed.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant reiterated the plea
that no fair opportunity was given to the appellant in the course of the domestic
enquiry and the criminal prosecution. He submitted that since the appellant had
been acquitted, the order of dismissal ought to be set aside.
6. The learned Special Government Pleader submitted that the decree
of proof required in a criminal prosecution and a domestic enquiry are entirely
different. He argued that this is a case where the attempt of the appellant to
tamper with the banker’s cheques issued in favour of the department was well
proved. When he was given an opportunity to participate the enquiry, he failed
to do so.
__________
Page 3 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 12:21:44 pm )

WA No. 3335 of 2026
7. The order of dismissal passed earlier was set aside at the instance
of the petitioner, who had raised a false plea that he was not given an
opportunity in the disciplinary proceedings. While the notice for the enquiry
sent to him by post was received by the writ petitioner, he refused to receive it
when a personal service of notice was attempted.
8. Recording these facts, the enquiry officer conducted a de nova
enquiry, perused the records and recommended the appropriate punishment for
the charges framed against him. Having voluntarily refrained from participating
in the enquiry proceedings, the appellant cannot seek a fresh enquiry or blame
the enquiry officer by claiming that he was not given an opportunity or that the
order was passed behind his back.
9. The learned Single Judge, who considered these averments, passed
the following order:
“4. The challenge in the present writ petition is
to the order imposing the punishment of dismissal
from service on the petitioner. The petitioner was
subjected to disciplinary proceedings and was
charged with the following:
Charge No.1: That Thiru S.Murali formerly
Assistant (now under Suspension) while working as
__________
Page 4 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 12:21:44 pm )

WA No. 3335 of 2026
Assistant in Guindy Assessment circle during the
period from 20.06.1997 to 16.12.1997 had encashed
Bankers Cheque for Rs.30,000/~ on 16.12.1997 issued
in the name of Commercial Tax Officer / Guindy
Assessment Circle by tampering it in his favour which
has resulted in loss of Revenue of Rs.30,000/~ to the
Government Exchequer.
Charge No.2: That Thiru S.Murali, while
working as Assistant in Guindy Assessment Circle
during the period from 20.06.1997 to 16.12.1997 had
attempted to encash cheque for Rs.4,00,000/~ issued
in the name of Commercial Tax Officer / Guindy
Assessment Circle by tampering it on 12.12.1997 in
favour of his sister’s name S.Gayathri, thereby
resulting in loss of Revenue of Rs.4,00,000/~ to the
Government Exchequer.
Charge No.3: That the said Thiru.S.Murali,
formerly Assistant Office of the Commercial Tax
Officer / Guindy Assessment Circle (now under
suspension) during the above said period had failed to
maintain absolute integrity and devotion to his duty
and there by violated Rule 20(1) of Tamil Nadu
Government Service Conduct Rules 1973.
5. The main challenge to the impugned order is that,
he was not been issued with the notice. However, a
reading of the impugned order which in turn has
quoted the enquiry officerâ s report clearly shows


that the hearing notices were issued to the last known
__________
Page 5 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 12:21:44 pm )

WA No. 3335 of 2026
residence of the petitioner found in the official records
has been returned with an endorsement ’No Such


Person’ and when notice was sought to be served in
person on the petitioner, he has refused to receive the
said notices by pretending that he was not the
addressee. All of which has been recorded by the
enquiry officer. The enquiry officer has also given the
petitioner a long rope and thereafter on the basis of
the available evidence, come to the conclusion that the
charges against the petitioner had been proved. The
petitioner has stolen the bankers cheque for a sum of
Rs.4,00,000/- drawn on the Central Guindy Branch by
Tvl.Leela Scotish Lace Co. Limited in favour of
Commercial Tax Officer, Guindy Assessment Circle
towards their arrears tampered with the name of the
payee and deposited it in his sister’s name in the State
Bank of India, M.K.B. Nagar Branch. This is a serious
charge which has been substantiated through
evidence. The petitioner has not been able to refute
the charges levelled against him and considering the
gravity and after affording due opportunities to the
petitioner, which he has deliberately refused to avail.
The enquiry officer has conducted enquiry and
submitted his report and based on which the impugned
order has been passed.
6. I see no reason to interfere with the impugned
order. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No
costs.”
__________
Page 6 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 12:21:44 pm )

WA No. 3335 of 2026
10. A delinquent, who did not participate in the enquiry proceedings
despite notice, cannot challenge the order passed against him on the ground of
lack of opportunity to defend. If at all he is aggrieved by the quantum of
punishment, his remedy is to prefer an appeal as per statute. The appellant has
not chosen to do so.
11. The learned Single Judge, considering the facts of the case in light
of the charges framed against him, dismissed the writ petition via a speaking
order. It is always open to the appellant to challenge the punishment before the
appellate authority, if he desires to do so.
12. With these observations, this Writ Appeal stands disposed of. No
costs.
(Dr.G.J.,J.) (E.M.,J.)
02-11-2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
rpl
To
1.The Secretary to Government
Commercial Taxes Department,
Government of Tamilnadu,
Fort St.George, Chennai – 600009.
__________
Page 7 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 12:21:44 pm )

WA No. 3335 of 2026
2.The Principal Commissioner and Commissioner of Commercial Taxes,
Commercial Taxes Department,
Government of Tamilnadu,
Ezhilagam, Chepauk, Chennai - 600009.
3.Joint Commissioner of Administration,
Commercial Taxes Department,
Ezhilagam, Chennai - 600009.
4.Deputy Commissioner,
PAPJAM Building,
Greams Road,
Chennai - 600008.
__________
Page 8 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 12:21:44 pm )

WA No. 3335 of 2026
DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN J.
and
E.MANOHARAN J.
rpl
WA No. 3335 of 2026
02-11-2026
__________
Page 9 of 9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 12:21:44 pm )