Judgment : 1. Heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned. 2. The petitioner has stated that he had been selected for appointment to the post of Tank Operator/Watchman, on daily wage basis, with effect from 1.6.1981. Thereafter, he had been brought on regular time scale of pay, on 20.1.1987. The petitioner had been paid the regular time scale of pay, with annual increments and other monetary and service benefits, till the date of his retirement. While so, the petitioner was placed under suspension, with effect from 29.7.2011, and he had not been allowed to retire from service on his attaining the age of superannuation on the said date. The reason for the suspension of the petitioner from service is that he had been awarded the regular time scale of pay, erroneously, and audit objections had been raised during the year 2004-05. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that the order of suspension issued against the petitioner, retaining him in service, is contrary to law and against the principles of natural justice. The order passed by the third respondent is arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India. 4. It has also been stated that the petitioner cannot be suspended from service due to the fault committed by some other person. The alleged excess payment made in favour of the petitioner is not due to his misrepresentation or fraud. The petitioner has put in 31 years of unblemished service in the Department concerned and he had been paid the regular time scale of pay, as per the order of the third respondent, as he had been appointed in a sanctioned post. In such circumstances, the petitioner had preferred the present writ petition before this Court, under article 226 of the constitution of India. 5. Per contra, the learned counsels appearing for the respondents had submitted that the petitioner had not been regularized in service. Therefore, he was not entitled for the time scale of pay. However, the petitioner has been paid the time scale of pay, erroneously. Such payment made in favour of the petitioner had caused serious financial loss to the Department concerned. Therefore, the petitioner had not been permitted to retire from service on his attaining the age of superannuation, on 29.7.2011. 6. However, the petitioner has been paid the time scale of pay, erroneously. Such payment made in favour of the petitioner had caused serious financial loss to the Department concerned. Therefore, the petitioner had not been permitted to retire from service on his attaining the age of superannuation, on 29.7.2011. 6. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned and on a perusal of the records available, this Court finds it appropriate to direct the respondents to complete the enquiry relating to the regularization of the service of the petitioner, as per Rule 9 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, it is for the respondents to pass appropriate orders relating to the request of the petitioner, for the payment of the retiral benefits, which may be due to him, based on the orders to be passed by the respondents. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Connected M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2012 are closed.