Judgment :- 1. The petitioner joined as Junior Assistant in Agriculture Department in the year 1959. In the year 1990, he was promoted as Assistant Accounts Officer and posted in the office of the District Collector, Madurai, where he had continued up to 21.1.1992. While he was working at Pudukottai, he was issued with a Charge Memo dated 26.8.1993 and 23.8.1989 containing serious allegations on financial irregularities. Subsequently, G.O.Ms.No.71, (Finance Department), dated 17.2.1997 was issued dropping all the charges. When the petitioner reached the age of superannuation, on 30.4.1997, the Government issued G.O.(2D)No.6, (Finance (T & A.I) Department), dated 29.04.1997 permitting him to retire from service without prejudice to the outcome of the criminal investigation pending against him. While so, the impugned order dated 19.3.1999 was passed by the first respondent withholding the DCRG payable to the petitioner pending finalisation of criminal proceedings. In such circumstances, the petitioner filed Original Application No.5344 of 2001 (W.P.No.49589 of 2006) to quash the impugned order dated 19.3.1999 and to direct the respondents to release the D.C.R.G. 2. The respondents filed counter affidavit refuting the allegations. It is stated that the respondents have followed Rule 60 (1)(c) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules for withholding DCRG pending finalisation of the Criminal proceedings against the petitioner. 3. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 4. The learned Special Government Pleader has produced the written instructions letter No.64545/T&A-1/2001, dated 09.12.2011. Paragraph 3 of the said written instruction is extracted hereunder: "The Director of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption in his letter dated 28.08.2010 has informed that 5 Charge sheets were filed in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate/Special Judge, Madurai on 10.02.2008 against Thiru R.Kandasamy along with Thiru R.Nallaperumal, formerly District Backward Classes and Minorities Welfare Officer, Madurai and 28 others. The charge sheets were taken on file on 24.06.2008 in S.C.No.10 to 14/2008. In all the five cases, Thiru R.Kandasamy is figuring as A5. The details of amount misappropriated by falsification of records in the five charge sheets are furnished below: It is very difficult to fix up the actual quantum of which Thiru R.Kandasamy (A.5) alone would be responsible, till the verdict of the Court is pronounced since accused involved in all the five cases in different permutation and combinations". 5. The details of amount misappropriated by falsification of records in the five charge sheets are furnished below: It is very difficult to fix up the actual quantum of which Thiru R.Kandasamy (A.5) alone would be responsible, till the verdict of the Court is pronounced since accused involved in all the five cases in different permutation and combinations". 5. From the aforesaid paragraph 3, it is very clear that the criminal case against the petitioner is still pending. In such circumstances, the petitioner is not entitled to seek for a direction for payment of D.C.R.G. 6. As rightly contended by the learned Special Government Pleader, Rule 60 (1)(c) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules empowers the Government to withhold the DCRG pending finalisation of the Judicial proceedings. Hence, I do not find any merit in the writ petition. The writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. No costs.