1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.08.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI and THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH W.A.(MD)Nos.646 and 686 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)Nos.2 and 2 of 2011 against W.P.(MD)Nos.10396 of 2010 and 9256 of 2010 W.A.(MD)No.646 of 2011: 1.The Agricultural Production Commissioner and Secretary to Government, Fort.St.George, Chennai 600 009. 2.The Chief Engineer, Agricultural Engineering Department, Nandanam,Chennai. ... Appellants/Respondents Vs. M.Balasubramanian ... Respondent/Petitioner Prayer: The Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order dated 11.08.2010 passed by this Court in W.P.(MD) No.10396 of 2010. Prayer in W.P.(MD)No.10396 of 2010: Petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned charge memo issued by the 2nd respondent in his proceedings No.xe 2/62241/2003(1) dated 31.7.2008 and consequential order passed by the 1st respondent in G.O.(3D).No.217 Agriculture (AA8) Department dated 31.12.2009 and quash the same as illegal and consequentially to direct the respondents to disburse the retirement benefits within the period that may be stipulated by this Hon'ble Court. W.A.(MD)No.686 of 2011: The District Collector, Madurai District, Madurai 625 020. ... Appellant/Respondent Vs. K.Karuppiah ... Respondent/Petitioner https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 Prayer: The Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order dated 20.07.2010 passed by this Court in W.P.(MD) No.9256 of 2010. Prayer in W.P.(MD)No.9256 of 2010: Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the respondent relating to R.C. NO. 33706/2010/Pa.A-1 dated 30.6.2010 and quash the condition alone imposed in the impugned Government orders and consequently direct the respondent to make payment of the pension and other retirement benefits within a specified time frame that may be fixed by this Court. For Appellants : Mr.R.Karthikeyan, Addl.Govt.Pleader For Respondents : Mr.V.P.Rajan in W.A.(MD).No.646 of 2011 Mr.S.Viswalingam in W.A.(MD)No.686 of 2011 COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by P.JYOTHIMANI,J.) These Writ Appeals are directed against the order of the learned Single Judge passed in W.P.(MD)Nos.10396 and 9256 of 2010, by which, the learned Single Judge, while allowing the Writ petitions, has quashed the charge memos framed against the Writ Petitioners. 2.Admittedly, in these two cases, the charges were framed against the Writ petitioners before their date of retirement and pending the charges, the Writ petitioners have attained the age of superannuation. When the question arose as to whether the department is entitled to proceed with the disciplinary proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, the learned Single Judge has held that if the department has not passed any orders, retaining the Writ petitioners in service, not allowing to retire, they have no right even to proceed against them under the Pension Rules and on that basis, the charge memos were quashed against which the Department has filed the present Writ Appeals. 3.The issue involved in these cases was considered by another Division Bench of this Court in Y.Raja Vs. The Joint Registrar of Cooperative Societies, Madurai Region, Madurai reported in 2011 (1) CTC 18, wherein the Division Bench has held that in cases where the departmental proceedings were initiated during the time when the person was in service and during the course of departmental proceeding, he attained the age of superannuation, the department is entitled to proceed with the disciplinary proceedings. But, the proceedings shall be under the Pension Rules. Holding so, the Division Bench has held that pending such disciplinary proceedings under the Pension Rules, the delinquent officer shall be paid the retirement benefits including the provisional pension as provided under the Pension Rules. The operative portion of the judgment of the Division Bench is as follows: https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 "20.In view of the above, this Writ Appeal must succeed and the order of the learned Single Judge should be set aside to the limited extent. However, with clarification that the pending Disciplinary proceedings against the respondent shall be deemed to be a proceeding initiated under Rule 9(2)(a) of the Pension Rules and the same may be continued, which may result in any order under Rule 9(1) of the Pension Rules. However, pending the said disciplinary proceedings, the Appellants shall disburse all the retirement benefits to the respondent including the provisional pension as provided in the Pension Rules." 4.It is also relevant to point out at this juncture that the Hon’ble Apex Court also had an occasion to consider such issue ofcourse in respect of the similar Rules in Andra Pradesh Pension Code in V.Padmanabham Vs. Government of Andra Pradesh reported in 2009(15) SCC 537, wherein the Supreme Court has also held that the disciplinary proceedings can be continued in spite of the fact that there has been some delay when there is a financial loss and such proceedings shall be as per the Pension Code. 5.In such view of the matter, the orders of the learned Single Judge are set aside and the Writ Appeals stand allowed to the effect that the appellants are entitled to proceed with the disciplinary proceedings against the respondents concerned under the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules. Making it clear that pending such disciplinary proceedings, the appellants shall disburse all the retirement benefits to the respondents, including provisional pension in accordance with Rule 60 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected M.Ps.are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Records) /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Agricultural Production Commissioner and Secretary to Government,Fort.St.George, Chennai 600 009. 2.The Chief Engineer, Agricultural Engineering Department,Nandanam,Chennai. 3.The District Collector,Madurai District,Madurai 625 020. nbj ssk/05.09.2011 /4c-3p/- W.A.(MD)Nos.646 and 686 of 2011 and M.P(MD)No.2 and 2 of 2011 17.08.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/