TIRUNELVELI: Several demands from the Tamil Nadu Revenue Department Officials' Association are not feasible, stated the district administration in a letter to the association's office bearers here on Thursday. Among their demands, the association had sought the reversal of a dismissal order of a revenue inspector, whose wife provided evidence that he had fathered a child in an extramarital affair.
Sources said that some revenue officials have been protesting for the last three months calling for the removal of Collector Dr K P Karthikeyan. They alleged that he has been unduly strict with revenue officials. A segment of government teachers also joined the officials' protest after Karthikeyan advised the school education department to take action against teachers accused of caste-based bias or sexual harassment.
Earlier, Revenue Inspector S Agnikumar's wife had lodged a complaint with the district administration, disclosing that her husband married another woman and had a child with her. Following a thorough inquiry, the administration dismissed Agnikumar under the Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules and the court upheld his dismissal. However, the executive committee of the revenue department officials' association has been urging the withdrawal of this dismissal order, which the district administration rejected now.
The executive committee of the association also urged the state government to prohibit IAS officers from being posted in districts, where they previously served as assistant collectors (training). Notably, both Karthikeyan and Corporation Commissioner Dr N O Sukhaputra had served in Tirunelveli in training roles.
Additionally, the association sought to cancel all disciplinary actions levelled against different officials taken under the same rule in a single administrative order. Further demands included the placement of association members at particular locations and cancellation of night duties for officials, who were assigned to prevent mineral and sand smuggling. However, in a detailed response, the administration noted that no existing rules allow for such exemptions based on union demands.