LexStreak
Read free →
Madras High Court· 02 September 2026

Is compliance with natural justice in a departmental enquiry tested by whether a fair opportunity was afforded, not by the number of show cause notices?

CE.17 DHARAPURAM PUBLIC SERVANTS v. S.SUKUMAR
WA.2639/2023 · 2026:MHC:3666 · W.A.NO.2639 OF 2023
Coram: Justice S.M.Subramaniam · Justice Krishnaswamy Govindarajan
🔖 Save this judgment🔔 Follow s.153 Tamil Nadu Co-operative So…📬 Get today's judgments
View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.
Answer

Compliance with natural justice in a departmental enquiry is tested by whether a fair opportunity was afforded, not by the number of show cause notices.

Yes. Compliance with natural justice in a departmental enquiry is tested by whether a fair opportunity was afforded, not by the number of show cause notices. Here the enquiry officer examined witnesses, the employee participated and defended his case, the enquiry report was furnished with a show cause notice and his explanation was considered before punishment, so the contention of violation was untenable.

Headnote

Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 — ss.82, 153, 181 — Departmental disciplinary proceedings — Suo motu revision — Natural justice — Delay in initiation — Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 — s.181 — s.153 — Registrar's power to direct an enquiry — Held: Where a revision under s.153 ends only in an order of remand, the Registrar is empowered to invoke s.181 and direct a Regional Joint Registrar to initiate suo motu revision, conduct an enquiry and pass orders on merits. (¶13) Principles of natural justice — Departmental enquiry — Fair opportunity, not the count of notices — Held further: The test is not whether two show cause notices were issued but whether a fair opportunity was afforded to the delinquent officer, who here participated at every stage and defended his case. (¶18, 19) Departmental disciplinary proceedings — Delay in initiation — Not a ground per se — Held further: Mere delay does not vitiate a charge memorandum; the nature of the allegations and the cause of delay must be weighed, and delay caused by the employee's own writ proceedings cannot be attributed to the employer. Writ appeal allowed. (¶15, 16)

Headnote

You've used your free headnotes this month

The answer above and the Court's own paragraphs stay free. LexStreak's full headnote on this judgment needs an account — a free one opens it again.

Create my free account
In the Court's own words
Paragraph 18Perusal of the entire documents would show that sufficient opportunities were afforded to the first respondent to defend his case. The Rules of natural justice had been followed and fair opportunity is afforded to the employee to defend his case. It is not about issuance of two show cause notices to be issued, but whether a fair opportunity was afforded to the delinquent officer. The test to be applied is whether the principles of natural justice has been complied with by affording a fair opportunity to the delinquent officer.
Paragraph 19In the present case, at every stage, opportunity was afforded to the first respondent and pertinently, the first respondent availed all the opportunities and submitted his explanations and defended his case. That being the factum, the grounds relating to rules of natural justice raised by the first respondent is untenable. The delay in initiation of departmental disciplinary proceedings cannot be attributed against the appellant Management since the first respondent filed a writ petition, in which, an interim order was passed, which resulted in issuance of Charge Memorandum in the year 2011.
Acts & Sections
s.153 Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983s.181 Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983s.82 Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983s.81 Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of CE.17 DHARAPURAM PUBLIC SERVANTS v. S.SUKUMAR — and get the Madras High Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment
Does mere delay in initiating departmental disciplinary proceedings by itself vitiate the charge memorandum?Is the Registrar empowered to invoke Section 181 of the Tamil Nadu Co-operative Societies Act, 1983 and issue directions in the interest of the society?
Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Madras High Court. Corrections