1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:10.11.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.RAJA WP(MD)No.12770 of 2011 S.Krishnasamy :Petitioner -Vs- 1.The Agricultural Production Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government, Agriculture (AA-2) Department, Secretariat, Chennai 600 009. 2.The Commissioner of Agriculture, Chennai 600 005. :Respondents PRAYER:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the first respondent relating to Government letter No.651/AA2/2007-4 dated 28.06.2010 and quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent to make disbursement of the pension and all other retirement benefits within a specified time. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Visvalingam For Respondents: Mrs.S.Bharathi,Government Advocate ORDER The petitioner has filed the present writ petition, challenging the impugned proceedings passed by the first respondent, The Agricultural Production Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government in Government Letter No.651/AA2/2007-4 dated 28.06.2010 to quash the same with consequential direction against the first respondent to disburse the petitioner's pension and his retirement benefits within the stipulated time. 2.The case of the petitioner is that after he was appointed as Agricultural Officer in the year 1977 through Tamilnadu Public Service Commission, he was promoted to the post of Assistant Director of Agriculture in the year 2005. Again, after 11 years, he was further promoted to the post of Deputy Director of Agriculture and continued the same post till his retirement. After reaching the age of superannuation on 30.06.2010, he was allowed to retire without prejudice to the disciplinary proceedings pending against him vide G.O.(3D)No.100 Agriculture Department dated 30.06.2010 Subsequently, the Government have issued charge memo under Rule 17-b of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules dated 28.06.2010, alleging that while he was serving as Agricultural Officer in Genguvarpatti, Theni District alleged to have issued identity cards in the name of farmers without field verification and ownership of lands. As a result of which, some of the middle men and traders had got some pecuniary advantages in selling copra in Veerapandi Primary Agricultural Co-operative Bank, Veerapandi between December 2000 and June 2001. The said charge memo was communicated to the petitioner only after his retirement viz., 01.07.2010 At this juncture, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the criminal case initiated against the subordinates in the Agriculture Department or Revenue Department were withdrawn by the Government, on the ground that no purpose would be served as there was already a finding that there was no loss of revenue to the Government. Coupled with one another https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 reason that there was no complaints from the agriculturists that they were paid lesser amounts. Therefore, the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that where the Government have taken a decision for withdrawal of the criminal case for two reasons that there was no loss of revenue to the Government and that there were no complaints from the agriculturist, the same reasons are also equally applicable to the present case viz., the department proceedings also in as much as the Government can not take double stand namely, one before the criminal Court and another before the Departmental Proceedings. 3.Secondly, it was also further contended that a batch of cases initiated on the similar issue has been disposed of by this Court by quashing the impugned similar charge memo on the ground of unexplained inordinate delay of 9 or 10 years in issuing the charge memo. One such order passed by this Court dated 10.08.2011 in W.P.(MD).No.8968 of 2011, states that this Court by quashing the disciplinary proceedings initiated under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, on the ground of inordinate delay in issuing the charge memo in the light of the ratio laid down by the Apex Court, in P.V.Mahadevan vs. M.D.Tamil Nadu Housing Board, reported in 2005(4) CTC 403, further, held that the respondent should disburse their pensions to which the writ petitioners therein were legally entitled. 4.The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent also agrees that a similar batch of cases have already been allowed on the ground of inordinate delay in issuing the charge memo. On these basis if I look at the present case, there has been an inordinate delay of 10 years in issuing the impugned charge memo, dated 28.06.2010 under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. Further, the petitioner was also permitted to retire from his service on reaching the age of superannuation on 30.06.2010. Moreover, the Government have already taken a policy decision to withdraw the criminal proceedings against the similarly placed persons, on the ground that there was no loss of revenue to the Government and that there were no complaints from the agriculturists that they were paid with lesser amount. In the light of the decision taken by the state and the orders passed by this Court, this Court is inclined to allow the present writ petition, by quashing the impugned charge memo dated 28.06.2010, as the same has been issued with the delay of 10 years. 5.It is needless to mention that the petitioner was already been retired from service viz., dated 30.06.2010, hence, the respondents are directed to send the pension proposals for further disbursement as expeditiously as possible preferably, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar / TRUE COPY / Sub Assistant Registrar To: 1.The Agricultural Production Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Govt, Agriculture (AA-2) Department, Secretariat, Chennai 600 009. 2.The Commissioner of Agriculture, Chennai 600 005. +1CC to The Special Government Pleader. SR.No.39100. RP/19.12.2011/2P/4C. W.P.(MD).No.12770 of 2011,10.11.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/