1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 08.09.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH W.A.(MD).No.773 of 2011 and M.P.No.2 of 2011 1.The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Public Service, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Chennai 9. 2.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. : Appellants/Respondents Vs. G.Ganapathy : Respondent/Petitioner PRAYER: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order dated 05.08.2010 made in W.P.(MD).No.10119 of 2010 on the file of this Court. PRAYER IN WP(MD)No. 10119 of 2010: and MP. No. 1 AND 2 OF 2010 DATED: 5.8.2010: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ, order or direction in particular Writ of Certiorarified mandamus to call for the records on the file of the 2nd respondent in connection with the impugned charge memo issued by him in his proceedings Roc. P2/39990/2009 Dated: 29.1.2010 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to settle the retirement benefits and pension benefits due to the petitioner forthwith. For Appellants : Mr.R.Karthikeyan Special Government Pleader For Respondent : Mrs.J.Nisha Banu JUDGMENT [Judgment of the Court was delivered BY P.JYOTHIMANI, J] The Writ Appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 05.08.2010 made in W.P.(MD).No.10119 of 2010. 2. The respondent/Writ Petitioner, on the date of attaining the age of superannuation, was permitted to retire from service, without prejudice to the disciplinary proceedings pending against him. 3. Admittedly, the disciplinary proceedings against the respondent/Writ Petitioner was instituted and after allowing him to retire, the charges https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 were served. Therefore, by virtue of a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Y.Raja Vs. The Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Madurai Region, Madurai reported in 2011 (1) CTC 18, the department is entitled to proceed under the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules [for short "the Rule"]. It is also relevant to point out in this case that even under Rule 9 (2) (a) of the Rules, which is as follows: "9.Right of Government to withhold or withdraw pension- (2)(a)The departmental proceeding referred to in sub rule (1), if instituted while the Government servant was in service, whether before his retirement or during his re employment, shall, after the final retirement of the Government servant be deemed to be proceedings under this rule and shall be continued and concluded by the authority by which they were commenced in the same manner as if the Government servant had continued in service." in relation to the proceedings, which are instituted, the authority has got a right to complete the proceedings. 4. In such view of the matter, the order dated 05.08.2010 made in W.P. (MD).No.10119 of 2010 stands set aside and the Writ Appeal stands allowed to the effect that the appellants are entitled to proceed with the disciplinary proceedings against the respondent/Writ Petitioner concerned under Rule 60 of the Rules. Making it clear that pending such disciplinary proceedings, the appellants shall disburse all the retirement benefits to the respondent/Writ Petitioner including provisional pension in accordance with Rule 60 of the Rules within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. SD ASST REGISTRAR ( CO ) /TRUE COPY/ SUB ASST REGISTRAR NB To 1.The Secretary to Government of Tamil Nadu, Public Service, Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Department, Chennai 9. 2.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. 1CC TO M/S. J. NISHA BANU, ADVOCATE, SR: 30721: DM::2011:SEPTEMBER:15:: JUDGMENT MADE IN W.A.(MD).No.773 of 2011 08.09.2011 2P:4C:: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/