Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 468 (MAD)

K. Sundari v. District Collector, Salem

2020-03-02

V.PARTHIBAN

body2020
JUDGMENT (Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent to disburse the petitioner's retirement benefits like General Provident Fund, Special provident Fund, Encashment of Earned Leave and Encashment of Un-earned Leave on Private Affairs to the petitioner.) 1. The writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondent to disburse the petitioner's retirement benefits like General Provident Fund, Special provident Fund, Encashment of Earned Leave and Encashment of Un-earned Leave on Private Affairs to the petitioner. 2. The case of the petitioner is that she was appointed as Typist in the Revenue Department on 12.04.1983 and subsequently she was promoted as Assistant on 27.07.1995. She was further promoted as Deputy Tahsildar on 02.07.2006 and also to the post of Tahsildar on 14.02.2011. Finally, she was promoted as Divisional Excise Officer on 02.12.2014. 3. On the basis of the complaint submitted to the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Department, the petitioner was suspended from service on 04.12.2014. In pursuance to the direction of this Court, she was reinstated back in service vide order dated 12.10.2017 and once again, she was suspended from service on the eve of her retirement on 29.09.2018, even-though, her superannuation day was due on 30.09.2018. 4. According to the petitioner, neither the criminal proceeding nor the disciplinary action, initiated against her, has attained the finality and she continued to be under suspension. Therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking for writ of mandamus for payment of certain retirement dues to her irrespective of the outcome of the disciplinary proceedings or the criminal proceedings pending against her. 5. When the matter is listed today, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the mandamus as sought for in this writ petition is squarely covered by the order dated 22.11.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.29950 of 2017 and also by the order of the Division Bench of this Court dated 26.02.2016 in W.A.No.207 of 2016. 6. The learned counsel would draw the attention to the order of the learned Single Judge dated 22.11.2017 in W.P.No.29950 of 2017, wherein the learned Single Judge has allowed similar claim, as found in paragraph no.3 and 4, which are extracted hereunder: “3. 6. The learned counsel would draw the attention to the order of the learned Single Judge dated 22.11.2017 in W.P.No.29950 of 2017, wherein the learned Single Judge has allowed similar claim, as found in paragraph no.3 and 4, which are extracted hereunder: “3. Admittedly, when the petitioner was serving as District Adidravidar and Tribal Welfare Officer at Villupuram, he had suffered an order of suspension on 22.10.2013 on the basis of registration of a criminal case by the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Department and he was also arrested and subsequently released on bail. In view of the same, he was placed under suspension by an order dated 22.10.2013. now, the grievance of the petitioner is that he is not allowed to retire from service, although he reached the age of superannuation on 31.10.2017, on the ground of pending criminal case. Subsequently, the petitioner has given a representation on 10.10.2017 to the 2nd respondent, making a request to disburse his retirement benefits, namely, his contribution towards General Provident Fund, Special Provident Fund, Encashment of earned leave and Encashment of unearned leave. 4. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to disburse the retirement benefits of the petitioner, namely, his contribution towards GPF, Special Provident Fund, Encashment of Earned Leave and Encashment of Unearned leave to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No costs.” 7. In fact, similar claim, which was allowed by another learned Single Judge in W.P.No.22228 of 2018 was the subject matter of the writ appeal in W.A.No.207 of 2016, wherein, the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.02.2016, upheld the decision of the learned Single Judge. The operative portion of the order of the Division Bench, as found in paragraph no.4 and 5 are extracted hereunder: “4. The learned Single Judge, considering all aspects of the matter, held that the petitioner was having earned leave and unearned leave on private affairs before initiation of the case and as such, he is entitled to encashment of earned leave and unearned leave on private affairs. The claim of gratuity was given up by the employee/writ petitioner on the ground that in the event of conviction and dismissal of service, the writ petitioner may not be entitled to get gratuity. The claim of gratuity was given up by the employee/writ petitioner on the ground that in the event of conviction and dismissal of service, the writ petitioner may not be entitled to get gratuity. The special provident fund was also not granted as the writ petitioner failed to establish any contribution made by him. While disposing of the writ petition, a direction was made to the appellants herein to disburse encashment of earned leave and encashment of unearned leave on private affairs. In respect of special provident fund, it was held that if contribution was made by the writ petitioner, the same can be paid to the petitioner. 5. We do not find any error, illegality or infirmity in the order sought to be impugned in this writ appeal preferred by the Tamil Nadu Generation and Electricity Distribution Corporation Ltd., warranting interference. Thus, the writ appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition stands closed.” 8. The learned counsel for the petitioner would therefore submit that similar directions may be issued by this Court. 9. The learned counsel for the respondent would possibly have no objection in adopting the course as adopted by the learned Single Judge as well by the Division Bench of this Court as extracted supra. 10. In view of the issue being covered squarely by the above decisions, this Court is inclined to pass similar direction. 11. Resultantly, this writ petition is disposed of by issuing direction to the respondent to disburse the retirement benefits of the petitioner like his contribution to the General Provident Fund as well as to the Special provident Fund, Encashment of Earned Leave and Encashment of Un-earned Leave on Private Affairs, as per her entitlement, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.