ORDER : M. Jeyapaul, J. This is an unfortunate case where the Chief Pharmacist attached to the Corporation of Madurai, who was suspended from service way back on June 12, 1981 waged many battles before this Court as against the Corporation of Madurai and ultimately died during the pendency of the current writ petition leaving his legal heirs virtually in the lurch. They having unfortunately stepped into the shoes of the deceased Chief Pharmacist contest this matter in order to get at least the pensionary benefits on the demise of the deceased Pharmacist A. Nagarathinam. 2. The deceased petitioner A. Nagarathinam was slapped with three major charges. The first major charge was framed on July 14, 1980. The said charge would read that the deceased A. Nagarathinam did not hand over the key of the Hospital where he was working as the Chief Pharmacist when he proceeded on leave. The second major charge was framed against him on June 4, 1981. The said charge would read that he failed to maintain the income and expenditure accounts and as a result of which, he showed supine indifference to his official duty. The third major charge was framed on July 9, 1981, which would read that he obstructed the substitute Doctor from performing his official duty.. About one month prior to the framing of the third charge, the petitioner A. Nagarathinam was suspended from service. 3. He was slapped with a single show cause notice by the 1 st respondent on August 3, 1983 calling upon him to answer as to why he should not be removed from service. By the by, all the aforesaid three major charges, which arose on different dates were combined together in the aforesaid show cause notice. 4. The fact remains that the deceased A. Nagarathinam had filed proceedings in W.P. 9505/1983 to direct the 1st respondent to pay subsistence allowance. Unfortunately, the,-Enquiry Officer Dr. Vijayaraghavan, who was appointed by the 1st respondent to enquire into the 2nd and 3rd major charges took full additional charge as Commissioner, Corporation of Madurai, passed a final order of punishment removing the petitioner A. Nagarathinam from service, which provoked him to file a writ petition in W.P. 13403/1990 praying to quash the said order of punishment after, of course, exhausting appeal remedy. This Court specifically directed the 1st respondent to pass appropriate orders in the enquiry embarked upon as against the petitioner A. Nagarathinam, having regard to the contention raised by him within the time frame fixed by this Court and allowed the writ petition filed by him to quash the punishment awarded by the 1 st respondent. 5. The petitioner A. Nagarathinam had consistently taken a stand that the enquiry entrusted to the two different Enquiry Officers namely Dr. Vijayaraghavan and Dr. Thiyagraj were not completed and as a result of which, the enquiry report could not be served on him. He has also set up a plea that the material witnesses were not produced for examination during the course of enquiry. 6. The 1st respondent, after disposal of the writ petition in W.P. No. 13403/1990 giving the aforesaid direction to the 1st respondent, simply appointed a Chief Accountant M. Panchacharam to enquire into the charges framed as against the petitioner A. Nagarathinam. The said Enquiry official, having simply adverted to each and every charge, made note of the reply given by the petitioner A. Nagarathinam. The said proceeding containing the nature of charges and reply given by the petitioner herein has been referred to as the enquiry report by the 1 s\t respondent in the impugned order passed.