Judgement

Mr.V.OM Prakash Government Advocate vs Mr.K.R.Laxman

Madras High Court Justice Hon’ble S.M.Subramaniam & Hon’ble Dr.Justice A.D.Maria Clete Mr.V.OM Prakash Government Advocate vs Mr.K.R.Laxman on 17 June, 2025 Law Point: JUDGEMENT 1. The present writ appeal has been instituted challenging the writ order dated 01.02.2018, passed in W.P.(MD) No.248 of 2018. 2. The respondents in the said writ petition are the appellants […]

Mr.V.OM Prakash Government Advocate vs Mr.K.R.Laxman
Judgement Shonee Kapoor

Mr.V.OM Prakash Government Advocate vs Mr.K.R.Laxman

Shonee Kapoor, men's rights activist and legal consultant in India

Written and analysed by Shonee Kapoor

Legal Consultant, Author & Men's Rights Activist

Madras High Court

Justice Hon’ble S.M.Subramaniam & Hon’ble Dr.Justice A.D.Maria Clete

Mr.V.OM Prakash Government Advocate vs Mr.K.R.Laxman on 17 June, 2025

Law Point: 

JUDGEMENT

1. The present writ appeal has been instituted challenging the writ order dated 01.02.2018, passed in W.P.(MD) No.248 of 2018.

2. The respondents in the said writ petition are the appellants herein.

3. The respondent / writ petitioner was appointed as a Dental Assistant in the Government Upgraded Primary Health Centre for a period of
one year on contract basis. The contractual engagement was renewed from time to time. The respondent was implicated in a criminal case. Thus, he was disengaged by the appellants vide order dated 13.07.2017. The writ court formed an opinion that the criminal case registered in a matrimonial dispute may not be an impediment for continuance of the government contractual employment.

4. Under the Tamil Nadu Government Servants’ Conduct Rules, 1973, matrimonial dispute is also a misconduct and the Government Departments are empowered to initiate action against such misconducts. A public servant is expected to maintain honesty, integrity and good conduct both inside the office and in the society. Therefore, for the misconduct, even if it is committed in the matrimonial relationship, the Government Departments are empowered to initiate departmental disciplinary proceedings. Pertinently, in the present case, the respondent was engaged as a contractual employee and the period of contract was also expired and the respondent was disengaged in the year 2017 itself. Thus, the writ order is not inconsonance with the principles established.

5. Accordingly, the writ order dated 01.02.2018, passed in W.P. (MD) No.248 of 2018, is set aside and the writ appeal stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

DISCLAIMER: The above judgement is posted for informational purpose ONLY. Printout/ Copy from this website are not admissible citation in the Court of Law. For a court admissible copy contact your advocate.

You may contact me for consultation or advice by visiting Contact Us

Tags

Judgement Madras High Court

Share

Shonee Kapoor, men's rights activist and legal consultant in India

Shonee Kapoor

Indian men's rights activist, legal consultant and author focused on matrimonial law, 498A, maintenance, child custody, parental alienation and gender-neutral laws. He is not an advocate or lawyer.

Share Your Thoughts

Comments are moderated before publication.