Unable to use juniors for personal work: Madras High Court | Chennai News
Justice S. M. Subramaniam said senior officials using officials for personal gain constitute misconduct under the rules which will lead to indiscipline in uniformed services. By virtue of the superior position, subordinate officials cannot refuse such services. When senior officials abuse the service of officials, they cannot expect work discipline or good conduct from their subordinates.
“They too are trying to take unfair advantage of the weaknesses of senior officials or they are trying to please these officials,” observed the judge.
If such a complaint or information is received, the department is obligated to take all further actions against such senior officials to maintain discipline and decorum among uniformed service personnel, the judge said.
The court made the comments when hearing a motion filed by P Vadivel who was appointed as a grade II warden in 2013 and assigned to Trichy Central Prison.
Although he was transferred to Karur Central Prison in 2018 and took up duty there, he did not leave his official quarters in Trichy. Therefore, penal rent was imposed on him to challenge that he filed the present petition in HC Madurai bench in 2020.
Counsel for the claimant argued that under the oral permission granted by the Superintendent of Trichy Prisons, Vadivel continued to reside in his official quarters and performed the duties of a driver for the Superintendent of Trichy Prisons.
The State argued that certain temporary tasks entrusted to the petitioner at the Trichy prison cannot constitute a reason for him to keep the official quarters. When he was transferred, he should have left the accommodation within a month, but he only did so in 2019. Thus, a penal rent according to the rules in force was imposed on him.
Justice SM Subramaniam observed that official quarters are provided solely for the purpose of the effective exercise of public office in a particular office.
Any transferred employee does not have the right to keep the official accommodation allocated to him beyond the period provided for.
The other functions or temporary functions assigned by the superintendent of prisons are of no use in exonerating the petitioner from the payment of the penal allowance, observed the judge, while rejecting the petition.