The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has allowed a writ appeal filed by health authorities in Ramanathapuram, setting aside the 2018 order of the writ court which had directed reinstatement of a contractual Dental Assistant implicated in a criminal case. The Bench held that even matrimonial disputes can amount to misconduct under the Tamil Nadu Government Servants’ Conduct Rules, 1973.
The Division Bench comprising Justice S.M. Subramaniam and Dr. Justice A.D. Maria Clete passed the judgment on 17 June 2025 in W.A.(MD) No.182 of 2020, filed by the Executive Secretary of the District Health Society and others.
Background
The respondent in the writ appeal, K.S. Subha Karuthukhan, was appointed on a contract basis as a Dental Assistant at the Government Upgraded Primary Health Centre in Bogaloor, Ramanathapuram District. His contract, initially for one year, was renewed periodically.
However, following his implication in a criminal case arising from a matrimonial dispute, the authorities disengaged him from service by an order dated 13 July 2017.
In 2018, he challenged the termination through W.P.(MD) No.248 of 2018. The Single Judge Bench had ruled in his favour, opining that the criminal case in a matrimonial matter should not act as a bar to continued government contractual employment.
Legal Analysis
The Division Bench disagreed with the writ court’s reasoning, stating:
“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.”
The court emphasized that public servants are expected to uphold integrity and good conduct not only within office premises but also in society. It noted that even misconduct in a matrimonial relationship can justify departmental proceedings.
Furthermore, the court underscored that the respondent was not a regular employee but was engaged on a contractual basis, and his engagement had already expired by the time of disengagement in 2017.
“The respondent was engaged as a contractual employee and the period of contract was also expired… Thus, the writ order is not inconsonance with the principles established.”
Decision
The High Court allowed the writ appeal and set aside the order dated 1 February 2018 passed in W.P.(MD) No.248 of 2018. The court held that no costs would be imposed and closed the connected miscellaneous petition as well.
