S.K.Jahen Mohan vs The Chief Engineer (Distribution)

W.A.No.3343 of 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 04-11-2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR JUSTICE G. JAYACHANDRAN
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE E.MANOHARAN
W.A.No.3343 of 2026
CNR:{HCMA011872582026}
and
C.M.P.No.29822 of 2026
S.K.Jahen Mohan,
S/o.S.Krishnamoorthhy,
135/2, AJS Residency I Floor,
Mullai Nagar, TVMalai Road,
… Appellant
Gingee- 604 202.
Vs.
1. The Chief Engineer (Distribution)
Villupuram Region,
TANGEDCO Ltd.,
No.10, Old Power House Road,
Villupuram-605 602.
2.The Superintending Engineer,
Villupuram Electricity Distribution Circle,
TANGEDCO Ltd.,
Villupuram-605602. … Respondents
Prayer: Writ Appeal has been filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act, to set
aside the order dated 30-04-2026 made in W.P.No.17462 of 2026 passed by the
Honourable High Court by allowing this Writ Appeal.
For Appellant: A.V.Arun
For Respondents: Mr.M.Loganathan,
Standing Counsel, for TNEB
Page Nos.1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 04:06:29 pm )

W.A.No.3343 of 2026
O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by G.Jayachandran J.)
The petitioner herein was working as Assistant Executive Engineer in
TANGEDCO, was caught red-handed in a trap proceeding initiated by the
DVAC while receiving a sum of Rs.5,000/- to entertain application from a
farmer for shifting the service connection from open well to borewell.
2. Pursuant to the criminal prosecution under Section 7A of the
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, the department initiated disciplinary
proceedings against the writ petitioner. Citing that the charge sheet in the
criminal prosecution and the charge memo in the disciplinary proceedings are
identical, therefore, the petitioner contended that if the departmental
proceedings are allowed to proceed further based on the charge sheet, it will
gravely prejudice the petitioner.
3. The learned Single Judge, after considering the judgments rendered by
by Courts in case of similar nature, particularly the judgment rendered in
W.A.No.137 of 2026, has passed the following order:-
“3. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of
with the following directions:
Page Nos.2/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 04:06:29 pm )

W.A.No.3343 of 2026
a) The departmental enquiry as initiated by the
disciplinary authority by appointing a second enquiry
officer, who already issued a summon in this regard to
commence the enquiry, can proceed;
b) The writ petitioner shall give full cooperation for
the conduction and completion of enquiry;
c) The enquiry shall be completed as early as
possible preferably within a period of three months from
the date of receipt of a copy of this order;
d) However, the enquiry officer shall keep the
enquiry officer’s report in a sealed cover and whenever it
is called for by this Court, the same shall be produced for
further action;
e) The disciplinary proceedings by way of enquiry
as well as this order would no way prejudice the right of
the writ petitioner to take whatever defence he want to
take before the criminal court in the pending trial and it is
also not an impediment for the criminal Court to proceed
with the trial according to their schedule;
f) Connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
There shall be no order as to costs;
h) It is needless to state that the writ petition is
subject to the result of the writ appeal in W.A.No.137 of
2026.”
Page Nos.3/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 04:06:29 pm )

W.A.No.3343 of 2026
4. The Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that when
the charges in the final report/charge sheet and the allegations in the charge
memo containing imputation of charges are identical, allowing the departmental
proceedings to proceed, the right of defending the criminal case will be diluted
since the line of defence will be disclosed.
5. We find that the said submission is not tenable since the proof required
in a criminal prosecution and the degree of proof required in departmental
proceeding are entirely different and grounds of prejudice and the right to keep
the line of defence close to the chest cannot enure to the benefit of prolonging
the departmental proceedings endlessly.
6. The learned Single Judge, having considered the submissions made on
behalf of the appellant had rightly observed that the outcome of the disciplinary
proceedings shall be kept in a close sealed cover and action to be taken after the
disposal of the criminal trial. In such circumstances, we find no merit in the
writ appeal.
7. However, taking note of the fact that the learned Single Judge directed
the disciplinary authority to complete the departmental proceedings within a
Page Nos.4/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 04:06:29 pm )

W.A.No.3343 of 2026
period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of the order, which was
passed on 03.04.2026, we clarify that three-months period will commence from
today.
8. With the aforesaid clarification, the Writ Appeal is disposed of. There
shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is
closed.
(Dr. G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.) & (E.MANOHARAN J.)
04-11-2026
Index :Yes/No.
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Internet :Yes.
Neutral Citation :Yes/No.
Page Nos.5/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 04:06:29 pm )

W.A.No.3343 of 2026
To,
1. The Chief Engineer (Distribution)
Villupuram Region,
TANGEDCO Ltd.,
No.10, Old Power House Road,
Villupuram-605 602.
2.The Superintending Engineer,
Villupuram Electricity Distribution Circle,
TANGEDCO Ltd.,
Villupuram-605602.
Page Nos.6/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 04:06:29 pm )

W.A.No.3343 of 2026
Dr. G.JAYACHANDRAN, J.
AND
E.MANOHARAN, J.
bsm
W.A.No.3343 of 2026
and
C.M.P.No.29822 of 2026
04-11-2026
Page Nos.7/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 05/11/2026 04:06:29 pm )