1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 30.11.2011 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.(MD)No. 13355 of 2011 K.S.Rajamanickam ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Agricultural Production Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government, Agriculture (AA-2) Department, Secretariat, Chennai 600 009. 2.The Principal Secretary to Government, Cooperation, Food and Consumer Protection Department, Secretariat, Chennai 600 009. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the second respondent relating to G.O.2(D) No. 14 Co-operation Food and Consumer Protection Department dated 28.2.2004 and consequential charge memorandum issued by the first and the second respondents in Government letter No. 27533/AA2/2006-22 dated 13.1.2011 and in Government letter No. 37390/CM1/2005-16 dated 29.8.2011 and quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent to make disbursement of the pension and all other retirement benefits within a specified time frame that may be fixed this Court and pas such other orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Visvalingam For Respondents : Mrs.S.Bharathi Government Advocate O R D E R The petitioner, who was appointed as Senior Inspector in Co- operative department through Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission on 10.4.1969 in the Cooperative Training College, Chennai, was subsequently promoted to the post of Cooperative Sub Registrar in the year 1986 and further promoted as Cooperative Deputy Registrar in the year 1988 with 25 years of service, even till the date of retirement, he was not issued with any Charge Memo. However, after seven years from the date of retirement, he was issued with the Charge Memo by the Agricultural Production Commissioner in his letter dated 27533/AA2/ 2006-22, dated 13.1.2011 with two charges. 2.The charge No.1 says that he failed to make field inspection which facilitated the traders and middlemen to sell copra in D.D.218 Palani Agricultural Producer's Cooperative Marketing Society, Palani, in the procurement of copra made between August 2000 and March 2001. Subsequently, criminal cases were also initiated against the petitioner and others. After some time, the State Government has taken a policy decision to withdraw all the criminal cases throughout the State of Tamil Nadu against the subordinates in the Agricultural Department, Cooperative Department and Revenue Department on the ground that there was a delay of more than ten years in issuance of charge memo, therefore, it would be impossible to collect evidence to substantiate their case before the criminal court. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3. When the Government issued G.O.No.210, Agriculture Department AA- 2, dated 9.10.2009, taking a policy decision that the cases filed before the criminal court are not worthy to be proceeded, the same analogy will be applied to the cases pending before the Departments. On that basis, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that when the Government has already taken a policy decision to withdraw all the criminal cases on the ground of huge delay in issuing the charge memo, it would be highly impossible to collect the acceptable evidence to establish the criminal charges against the delinquent officer and the same reasoning would be equally applicable to the departmental proceedings. Accepting this reasoning, this Court in similar matters has quashed the charge memo, which were issued belatedly with inordinate delay of more than 10 years. On that basis, he prayed to quash the impugned charge memo dated 13.01.2011 which was issued with a delay of 11 years. 4. In support of his submission, he relied upon an order passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.586 to 587 of 2007 dated 5.11.2007 (P.V.Mahadevan Vs. M.D.Tamil Nadu Housing Board) followed by another order passed by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No. 610 of 2008 dated 6.3.2009 (T.N.Principal Secretary Home (SC) Department,Chennai and another Vs. R.Ramarajan,IPS, Superintendent of Police T.N.Commando Chennai 28 and other) reported in 2009(3) TLNJ 132 (Civil) and yet another order in the case of B.K.Gunasekaran Vs.State of T.N. reported in 2010 (7) MLJ 161 in W.P. No. 9856 of 2010. 5. In reply, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents would submit that the Government has filed a Writ Appeal against one of the orders, however the same was denied by the learned counsel for the petitioner contending that even that Writ Appeal also was dismissed. 6. However, the above said submission of the learned Government Advocate may not hold any reason in view of the earlier order passed by the Division Bench in W.A.Nos. 586 and 587 of 2007 dated 5.11.2007 and another order passed on W.A. No. 610 of 2008 dated 6.3.2009. When this Court has consistently passed an uniform order in copra cases quashing the charge memo on the ground that the Government has taken a stand to withdraw all the criminal cases for the reason that it would be impossible for them due to inordinate delay to establish the charges against the delinquent Government employees, the said reason would equally apply to the departmental proceedings as well. 7. In that view of the matter, the present impugned charge memo which has been passed with huge inordinate delay of 11 years is liable to be quashed. Accordingly, finding no sufficient reason to condone the delay for issuance of charge memo, that too, with the delay of 11 years, from the date of retirement of the petitioner, this Court is bound to follow the earlier order passed by this Court as well as the orders passed by the Division Bench. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 8. In view of the above, the Writ Petition stands allowed and the impugned delayed charge memo with inordinate delay of 11 years is quashed. It is needless to mention that since the petitioner retired from service, the respondents are directed to release pensionary benefits of the petitioner preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AS) / True Copy / Sub Assistant Registrar To, 1.The Agricultural Production Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Government,Agriculture (AA-2) Department, Secretariat, Chennai 600 009. 2.The Principal Secretary to Government,Cooperation, Food and Consumer Protection Department,Secretariat, Chennai 600 009. +1CC TO THE SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SR :42253 Ses SR :13.06.2012 : 3p/4c W.P.(MD)No. 13355 of 2011 30.11.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/