1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.08.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR W.P.(MD).No.9205 of 2011 V.Rosede Nayagam : Petitioner Vs. 1.The Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. 2.The Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Revenue Administration, Chepauk, Chennai-5. 3.The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi. : Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to dispose the pending file 39121/service IV-1/2009, according to law based on the petitioner's representation dated 12.01.2011 within a specific period of time so as to enable the petitioner to get pension and other benefits of retirement. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Muthalraj For Respondents : Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen Additional Government Pleader ORDER Seeking for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Fort St. George, Chennai, the first respondent herein, to dispose of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal ) Rules and stated to be pending in File No.39121/service IV-1/2009, the petitioner has come forward with the present Writ Petition. It is his further case that though a representation dated 22.11.2010 and a further reminder dated 12.01.2011 were submitted to the Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Chennai, no orders have been passed so far. 2. According to the petitioner, the occurrence is said to have been taken place in the year 1991 and that he attained the age of superannuation on 31.03.2005. The petitioner has also submitted that for nearly six years, he is under suspension. 3. Considering the grievance of the petitioner, Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen, learned Additional Government Pleader, was put on notice on facts. He submitted that appropriate orders would be passed on the disciplinary proceedings and prayed for sufficient time. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 4. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 5. Pleadings disclose that on 10.02.2007, the disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Tuticorin, to wit (i) that as the Tahsildar, Tuticorin, he did not contact the Government Pleader, Tuticorin, and instruct him to argue a case in O.S.No.272 of 1989 in favour of the Government and, thereby, failed in his duty; (ii) that he did not take suitable action to file an appeal within 90 days from the date of judgment on 12.02.1991. Materials indicate that for the above said alleged acts of misconduct, disciplinary proceedings have been initiated by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Tuticorin, after 14 years, for which, an explanation has also been submitted on 23.07.2007. The District Supply Officer, Tuticorin, who was appointed as the Enquiry Officer, has submitted his report on 28.09.2007. Pursuant to which, a personal enquiry was also held on 05.05.2008. Thereafter, the disciplinary proceedings have been referred to the Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Chennai, in File No.39121/Services IV-1/2009. In the meanwhile, the petitioner had attained the age of superannuation. 6. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, for the alleged occurrence said to have been taken place in the year 1991, if the disciplinary proceedings, which had been initiated belatedly on 10.02.2007, are still kept pending, that would certainly cause great hardship to the petitioner. 7. Since the petitioner is kept under prolonged suspension, a duty is cast on the first respondent to pass orders on the disciplinary proceedings, as expeditiously as possible. It is well settled that a Government servant is entitled to retiral benefits on the date of superannuation. 8. For the reasons stated supra, this Court is inclined to issue a Mandamus, directing the Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Chennai, the first respondent herein, to pass orders on the disciplinary proceedings, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The second and third respondents are further directed to forward all necessary particulars to the Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Chennai, so as to enable him to pass orders, within the time frame. It is made clear that if no orders are passed, within the stipulated time, that would not clothe any right to the petitioner to claim any deemed completion of the disciplinary proceedings. The first respondent is further directed to pass orders, within the stipulated period, in order to avoid further litigation. 9. The Writ Petition stands disposed of in the above terms. No costs. SD/- Assistant Registrar (AE) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(C.S) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 To 1.The Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. 2.The Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Revenue Administration, Chepauk, Chennai-5. 3.The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi. +1. CC to Mr.S.Muthal Raj, Advocate, SR.No.27959 +1. CC to the Special Government Pleader, SR.No. 28115 SML Order made in W.P.(MD).No.9205 of 2011 Dated:- 17.08.2011 TR : 24.08.2011: 3p/6c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/