JUDGMENT (Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records connected with the impugned order of demand dated 25.11.2011 passed by the third respondent in proceedings No.E9/2662/TNSTC(Salem)/ 2011 quash the same on the basis of the orders passed by the Madurai Bench of this Court in WP (MD) No.12765 of 2012 etc., batch dated 01.08.2013 which has been followed by this Court in WP No.6339 of 2014 dated 19.09.2014 and also direct the respondents to disburse forthwith all the retiral benefits viz., Pension, Gratuity, Surrender Leave Salary and other terminal benefits etc., legitimately due to the petitioner with 12% rate of interest for the belated payment from the date on which they were due till the date of payment.) 1. The order impugned dated 25.11.2011 directing the writ petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.80,730/- in lieu of the punishment of stoppage of increment imposed on him, is under challenge in the present writ petition. 2. The petitioner was a Conductor in the respondent-Transport Corporation and retired from service on 30.11.2011. The original petitioner died and the legal heirs are impleaded. 3. The grievance of the petitioners 2 to 4 is that the terminal beenfits due to the deceased first petitioner were not settled and further a sum of Rs.80,730/- sought to be recovered without issuing any show cause notice. Thus, the present writ petition is filed by the legal heirs (petitioners 2 to 4) of the deceased first petitioner. 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents made a submission that it is not a recovery issued based on the audit objections or regarding the payment of excess salary. The amount sought to be adjusted is towards the punishment of stoppage of increment imposed on the deceased employee. Therefore, no further notice is required. 5. The punishment of stoppage of increment was issued when the employee was in service and on account of the superannuation, the respondents issued the order, directing the employee to pay the sum equivalent to the punishment of stoppage of increment imposed. 6. Therefore, no further notice is required. 5. The punishment of stoppage of increment was issued when the employee was in service and on account of the superannuation, the respondents issued the order, directing the employee to pay the sum equivalent to the punishment of stoppage of increment imposed. 6. However, during the pendency of the writ petition, the original petitioner died and the learned counsel for the petitioners, on instructions from the legal heirs of the original petitioner, made a submission that the said sum stated in the order impugned dated 25.11.2011 shall be adjusted from the terminal and retirement benefits due to the original petitioner and the balance amount may be paid along with interest as applicable. 7. In view of the undertaking given by the learned counsel for the petitioners on behalf of the legal heirs of the original petitioner, this Court is inclined to direct the respondents to recover the sum of Rs.80,730/- as per the impugned order dated 25.11.2011 and settle the balance terminal and retirement benefits due to the deceased employee in favour of the legal heirs along with interest as per Rules in force, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. As far as the order impugned is concerned, the legal heirs of the original petitioner, are at liberty to approach the Competent Authority of the respondent-Transport Corporation. 8. With the abovesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.