WA(MD) No. 572 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 12-08-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V. KARTHIKEYAN AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL WA(MD) No. 572 of 2026 and C.M.P.(MD)No.5411 of 2026 1. The Managing Director Tamil Nadu Water Supply and Drainage Board (TWAD), No.31, Kamarajar Salai, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005. 2. The Executive Engineer, TWAD Board, Project Maintenance Division, Opposite to Mattuthavani Bus Stand, Madurai. ..Petitioner(s) Vs M.Ilanchezhian ..Respondent(s) Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, praying to prefer this Memorandum of Grounds of Writ Appeal against the order dated 11.03.2026 made in W.P.(MD)No.6467 of 2026. For Petitioner(s): Mr.B.Saravanan Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.B.Vijaykarthikeyan For Respondent(s): Mr. H.Arumugam https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WA(MD) No. 572 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by C.V.Karthikeyan J.) Heard the learned Additional Advocate General for the appellants and the learned Counsel for the respondent. 2.The writ appeal had been filed questioning the order dated 11.03.2026 of the learned Single Judge, whereby the learned Single Judge had held that there was no justification on the part of the appellant to continue to keep the respondent /writ petitioner in suspension. 3.We hold it prudent that we do not enter into the discussion of the facts. But we would only record that the respondent/writ petitioner had been placed under suspension and show cause notice had been issued and thereafter, matter came to a standstill. Complaining that he had been kept under prolonged suspension, the writ petitioner filed the writ petition. The arguments advanced found favour with the learned Single Judge and the suspension was directed to be revoked. 4.The learned Additional Advocate General, today presented before us a copy of proceedings of the Managing Director/ appellant TWAD Board in proceedings No.10187 /Estt. (DP)/ A2/2024 dated 08.07.2026 appointing an Enquiry Officer to enquire into the charges framed against the respondent /writ https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WA(MD) No. 572 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 petitioner. In the said proceedings, the Enquiry Officer was also requested to complete the enquiry within a period of 30 working days. Since the facts now have to be reassessed or assessed by the Enquiry Officer, we consciously refrain from narrating the facts of the case. However, since now an Enquiry Officer had been appointed, the onus is now on the respondent /writ petitioner to participate in the enquiry proceedings diligently and also ensure that the same is completed within a period of 30 days. With respect to the issue of reinstatement as directed by the learned Single Judge, we would only state that the said direction shall be kept in abeyance and the appellants may pass appropriate orders in accordance with the findings written by the Enquiry Officer. 5.Accordingly, the writ appeal stands disposed of. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. (C.V.K.,J.) (R.S.V.,J.) 12-08-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No ta https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WA(MD) No. 572 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J. AND R.SAKTHIVEL, J. ta WA(MD) No. 572 of 2026 12-08-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis