IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 20.11..2009 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR W.P. No.30532 of 2008 C. Mahalingam ...Petitioner Vs. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Udayarpalayam, Ariyalur District. ... Respondent Prayer : Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the order of suspension No.RCA1/6220/2006, dated 31.10.2008 of the respondent along with the consequential proceedings RCA 1/6220/2006, dated 31.10.2008 of the respondent not permitting the petitioner to retire from service, quash both the proceedings and consequently direct the respondent to permit the petitioner to retire from service with effect from 31.10.2008 with all consequential retirement benefits. For Petitioner : Mr. S. Venkataraman For Respondent : Mrs. C.K.Vishnupriya Addl. Govt. Pleader ORDER This writ petition is filed to call for the records relating to the order of suspension No.RCA1/6220/2006, dated 31.10.2008 of the respondent along with the consequential proceedings RCA 1/6220/2006, dated 31.10.2008 of the respondent, not permitting the petitioner to retire from service, quash both the proceedings and consequently direct the respondent to permit the petitioner to retire from service with effect from 31.10.2008 with all consequential retirement benefits. 2. The petitioner, while working as Village Administrative Officer, was suspended on 31.10.2008 on the date of his retirement and was not allowed to retire from service by another proceedings dated 31.10.2008. The reason for passing the above said order is that on 17.9.1998, the petitioner was arrested on the charges of corruption and was therefore suspended. The suspension order was challenged before the Administrative Tribunal and stayed in O.A.No. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 7927 of 1998. The suspension was initially stayed and subsequently, it was also revoked. The criminal case was pursued before the competent Court and the trial Court acquitted the petitioner in a case under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act. The State preferred an appeal in Crl.A. No.217 of 2004 and it was pending. Therefore, in view of the pendency of the criminal appeal, the petitioner was not allowed to retire. Challenging the said orders, the present writ petition is filed on various grounds. 3. At the time of final hearing, the learned counsel for petitioner produced the order dated 27.10.2009 passed in Crl.A.No. 217 of 2004 wherein, the State Appeal has been dismissed. Counter affidavit has been filed. Heard Mrs. C.K.Vishnupriya, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents. 4. In view of the change in circumstances resulting in dismissal of the State Appeal on 27.10.2009, the learned counsel for the petitioner restricted his prayer for a direction to the respondents to consider his case for revocation of the suspension and to allow him to retire by revoking the impugned orders. 5. Considering the above submissions, the substantial relief sought for in the writ petition is not decided. However, a direction is issued to the respondents or the appropriate authority to consider the representation of the petitioner to be submitted along with the copy of the order dated 27.10.2009 passed in Crl. A. No. 217 of 2004 so as to consider petitioner plea for revocation of the impugned orders. Such orders on merits may be decided within a reasonable time, preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the representation. This writ petition stands disposed of with the above directions. No costs. Sd/ Deputy Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar ra To The Revenue Divisional Officer, Udayarpalayam, Ariyalur District. 1 cc To Mr.S.Venkatraman, Advocate, SR.62774. 1 cc To The Government Pleader, SR.63250. WP No.30532/2008 GG(CO) RVL 16.12.2009 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/