JUDGMENT : 1. The instant Writ Petition has been filed challenging the proceedings of the first respondent in proceedings No.TNSTC/Legal/L1/483 dated 03.03.2009 and also for a direction to direct the respondents to grant the Review to the petitioner as a Selection Grade Senior Assistant from 01.02.2002 and to grant all consequential and monetary benefits to him. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that he joined service with the respondent Corporation as a Junior Assistant in the year 1975 and that he was promoted as Assistant in the year 1984 and thereafter, as a Senior Assistant in the year 1994. He retired from service on 30.06.2005. According to the petitioner, while he was in service, the second respondent issued a charge memo dated 17.06.2005, since he participated in strike from 10.11.2001 to 26.11.2001. According to him, similar charge memos were issued against his colleagues who have also participated in the strike. Thereafter, the second respondent imposed the punishment of salary cut for 25 days on the petitioner as well as his other colleagues who participated in the strike by order dated 18.06.2005. 3. According to the petitioner, after the change of political scenario, the Hon'ble Chief Minister on 09.08.2006, on the floor of the Assembly announced that the strike period of 17 days will be treated as duty in respect of the Transport Corporation workers and the said period will be regularised as service and all benefits will be granted to the employees. According to the petitioner, pursuant to the same, the respondent released salary for 17 days strike period to the petitioner but failed to release salary for the remaining 8 days stated to have been granted to him, in view of the withdrawal of all disciplinary proceedings and punishment as announced by the Hon'ble Chief Minister. 4. According to the petitioner, he was promoted as Senior Assistant in the year 1994 and the review as Selection Grade Senior Assistant was due for him from 01.02.2002. In view of the show cause notice issued by the second respondent, pending consideration as on 01.02.2002, it is the case of the petitioner that the respondent withheld his review as Selection Grade Senior Assistant. The petitioner has further contended that despite several representations, the respondents have not considered his promotion as Selection Grade Senior Assistant, even though he is eligible for the same. The petitioner has further contended that despite several representations, the respondents have not considered his promotion as Selection Grade Senior Assistant, even though he is eligible for the same. Since there was no response from the respondents, the petitioner approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in W.P.[MD]No.6417 of 2008, seeking for a direction to the respondents to consider the representation dated 10.03.2008, given by the petitioner for promotion as Selection Grade Senior Assistant. 5. A learned Single Judge of this Court passed an order dated 15.10.2008 in favour of the petitioner, directing the respondents to consider and pass orders on the representation dated 10.03.2008, within a period of six [6] weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. 6. In compliance with the order dated 15.10.2008, in W.P. [MD]No.6417 of 2008, the first respondent passed an order dated 03.03.2009, rejecting the request of the petitioner for promotion as Selection Grade Senior Assistant. Aggrieved by the order dated 03.03.2009, passed by the first respondent, the instant Writ Petition has been filed. 7. Heard Mr.G.Karnan, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.D.Sivaraman, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 8. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, for no fault of his, has been deprived of promotion as a Selection Grade Senior Assistant, which was due for him as on 01.02.2002. According to him, the punishment earlier imposed on the petitioner having been withdrawn by the respondent, the petitioner is entitled for promotion as a Selection Grade Senior Assistant as on 01.02.2002 and is also entitled for all consequential monetary benefits from 01.02.2002. 9. Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents would submit that the petitioner retired from service on 30.06.2005, whereas the punishment was withdrawn only with effect from 19.09.2006, pursuant to the Chief Minister's announcement on the floor of the Assembly on 09.08.2006. According to him, the petitioner retired from service prior to the withdrawal of the punishment imposed on the striking employees. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled for any promotion and consequently not entitled for monetary benefits. Discussion: 10. According to him, the petitioner retired from service prior to the withdrawal of the punishment imposed on the striking employees. Hence, the petitioner is not entitled for any promotion and consequently not entitled for monetary benefits. Discussion: 10. Admittedly, the disciplinary proceedings initiated against all the employees of the respondent Corporation, which includes the petitioner for having participated in a strike were withdrawn only with effect from 19.09.2006, pursuant to the announcement made by the Hon'ble Chief Minister on the floor of the Assembly on 09.08.2006. It is also an admitted fact that the petitioner retired from service on 30.06.2005. Therefore, the disciplinary proceedings against the employees who participated in the strike were directed to be withdrawn only after the petitioner's retirement. Therefore, the question of promoting the petitioner as a Selection Grade Senior Assistant with effect from 01.02.2002, will not arise as the disciplinary proceedings were not withdrawn as on the date of the petitioner's retirement. However, considering the fact that the employees who had participated in the strike and were in service while the disciplinary proceedings were withdrawn would have been benefited by promotions as well as consequential monetary benefits, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner should not be deprived some benefit, even-though, he had retired from service prior to the withdrawal of the disciplinary proceedings against the employees who had participated in the strike. However, he is not entitled for additional monetary benefits till the date of retirement as the punishment was withdrawn only after his retirement. 11. In the considered view of this Court, in the interest of justice, the respondents shall notionally promote the petitioner as a Selection Grade Senior Assistant with effect from 01.02.2002, without any monetary benefits till the date of retirement. However, the pensionary benefits will have to be revised appropriately by taking into consideration the notional promotion as Selection Grade Senior Assistant with effect from 01.02.2002. The respondents are directed to pay the arrears of revised pension with effect from the date of retirement up to date, within a period of four [4] months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 12. With the aforesaid directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.