Tiff with wife cannot affect promotion: High Court

Chennai: Stating that a dispute between an employee and his wife cannot be grounds for denying promotion, the Madras high court directed the Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation (TANGEDCO) to include the petitioner’s name in the panel for promotion and also provide increment within eight weeks. Justice D. Hariparanthaman was disposing of a petition from A .Velusamy, an assistant audit officer in the chief internal audit office, audit branch, Tangedco, which sought to direct the authorities to include his name in the panel for promotion to the post of internal audit officer.

The judge said, “Even if a private complaint for bigamy is pending, this cannot be put against the petitioner. It is a different matter if an allegation is made by the wife that the petitioner assaulted her and a criminal case is pending under IPC offences or an FIR is registered.” According to Velusamy, he was married in 2004, but since he had a family dispute with his wife, he had filed a petition for divorce that was pending before a lower court in Tiruchy.

His wife also filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights but this was dismissed in 2010. While so, she filed a private complaint before the jurisdictional magistrate alleging that he had remarried though they were still married. Based on the private complaint, his name was not included in the panel of assistant audit officer for promotion to the post of internal audit officer for 2014-15. He was placed under suspension on August 1, 2011.

Later, this was revoked and he was restored to duty from January 23, 2012. Thereafter, for reasons best known to the authorities, no annual increment was sanctioned to him. His representations did not evoke any response, he added. The judge said once the petitioner was restored to duty, he has to earn increments automatically. Not granting annual increments could be done only when there was a punishment operating against him. ”As it is not so, I am of the view that the authorities shall sanction the increments to which the petitioner is entitled to,” the judge added.