JUDGMENT (Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to (1) fix the pay of the petitioner's husband as on 10.09.1982 and sanction annual increments (2) re-fix his pay in the selection/special grades with effect from 10.08.1992 and 10.08.2002 (3) revise his pensionary benefits on that basis consequent on his re-fixation on 31.08.2013 (4) Sanction compound interest at 12% per annum for the delayed payment of arrears for the period from 28.05.2004 to 31.08.2013 and also (5) disburse the arrears of payment from 10.09.1982 to 27.05.2004 and pension from 01.09.2013 till 26.08.2014.) 1. The Writ of Mandamus is filed to direct the respondents to (1) fix the pay of the petitioner's husband as on 10.09.1982 and sanction annual increments (2) re-fix his pay in the selection/special grades with effect from 10.08.1992 and 10.08.2002 (3) revise his pensionary benefits on that basis consequent on his re-fixation on 31.08.2013 (4) Sanction compound interest at 12% per annum for the delayed payment of arrears for the period from 28.05.2004 to 31.08.2013 and also (5) disburse the arrears of payment from 10.09.1982 to 27.05.2004 and pension from 01.09.2013 till 26.08.2014. 2. The writ petitioner filed the present writ petition at the age of 60 years and the petitioner is not an employee. 3. The writ petitioner filed the present writ petition to claim the benefits of her deceased husband. The husband of the writ petitioner Mr.N.Jothilingam joined as Village Administrative Officer on 10.08.1982 and retired from service on 31.08.2013. 4. The husband of the writ petitioner was placed under suspension with effect from 20.01.1984. He filed O.A.No.2639 of 1990 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal and pursuant to the interim stay granted by the Tribunal, the order of suspension was revoked and he rejoined duty on 01.01.1991 i.e., after 7 years from the date of suspension. 5. A criminal case was registered against the husband of the writ petitioner and the said case ended with an order of acquittal. The departmental disciplinary proceedings and the charges framed against the writ petitioner was also quashed by the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in O.A.Nos.5992 of 1993 and 5815 of 1995. The husband of the writ petitioner filed WP No.23058 of 2009 and this Court directed the Authorities to regularise the period of suspension. 6. The departmental disciplinary proceedings and the charges framed against the writ petitioner was also quashed by the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in O.A.Nos.5992 of 1993 and 5815 of 1995. The husband of the writ petitioner filed WP No.23058 of 2009 and this Court directed the Authorities to regularise the period of suspension. 6. The grievance of the writ petitioner is that the probation was not declared on completion of two years of period and the petitioner suffered an order of suspension during the relevant point of time. Therefore, the pay of the writ petitioner was not correctly fixed in the year 1982. Even subsequently, the petitioner sustained monetary loss on account of erroneous fixation of pay. 7. In this regard, the petitioner's husband submitted a representation to fix the pay as on 10.09.1982 and sanction annual increment. Further representation was submitted to grant revision of pay in the Selection Grade and Special Grade with effect from 1982 and 2002 respectively. The husband of the writ petitioner died in the year 2014 and therefore, the present writ petition is filed by the writ petitioner 4 years after the death of her husband. 8. The petitioner, who is the wife of the deceased employee, cannot agitate the service conditions of her husband, more specifically, with reference to the year of 1982. If at all, any erroneous fixation of family pension or pensionary benefits, the spouse of the employee can agitate the matter and file a writ petition before the High Court. With reference to the fixation of pay of the year 1982 and grant of annual increments, an employee who was alive till the year 2014 ought to have redressed the same. However, the petitioner filed the present writ petition after a lapse of 4 years from the date of the death of the deceased employee seeking re-fixation of pay of her husband from the year 1982 onwards and with reference to the year 2004. 9. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Accountant- General of Tamil Nadu made a submission that all the terminal and pensionary benefits due to the deceased employee were already settled. As far as the leave encashment benefits are concerned, it is for the Department to consider the same and the Accountant General of Tamil Nadu has no say. 10. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Accountant- General of Tamil Nadu made a submission that all the terminal and pensionary benefits due to the deceased employee were already settled. As far as the leave encashment benefits are concerned, it is for the Department to consider the same and the Accountant General of Tamil Nadu has no say. 10. The fifth respondent-Revenue Divisional Officer filed the counter-affidavit stating that after the receipt of orders from Government for declaration of probation of Mr.N.Jothilingam and after regulation of his period of suspension as duty as per orders of this Court made in WP No.23058 of 2009 dated 23.04.2014, action was taken and the following attendant benefits were claimed and paid:- (1) The arrears of pay and allowances by notionally fixing pay and allowances with effect from 01.07.1983 and giving financial effect with effect from 28.05.2004 and also arrears of increment for the period from 28.05.2004 to 31.07.2013 to the tune of Rs.9,64,266/- was drawn and paid on 17.10.2017. (2) Leave salary amount of Rs.4,04,800/- was drawn and paid on 12.01.2018 (encashment). (3) Death cum Gratuity amount of Rs.5,65,440/- on 05.02.2018. (4) Arrears to the tune of Rs.13,278/- was drawn and paid on 04.08.2014, since suspension period from 20.01.1984 to 31.12.1990 was treated as duty. (5) Based on the relaxation of rules in connection with the declaration of probation with effect from 27.05.2004 the pay of Mr.N.Jothilingam was notionally fixed with effect from 01.07.1983 and the consequential benefits of Selection Grade, Special Grade and Special Pay for having completed 30 years of service were sanctioned and arrears were claimed and paid. (6) As Mr.N.Jothilingam died on 29.08.2014, family pension at Rs.9,600/- per month has been sanctioned by the Accountant General and the writ petitioner, as spouse of the deceased Government Servant, drawing the family pension. Thus, all the attendant benefits that accrued to the Village Administrative Officer were settled. There are no dues to be paid. 11. The arrears of pay and allowances by notionally fixing pay and allowances with effect from 01.07.1983 and giving financial effect with effect from 28.05.2004 and also arrears of increments for the period from 28.05.2004 to 31.07.2013 to the tune of Rs.9,64,266/- was drawn and paid on 17.10.2017. Also leave salary amount of Rs.4,04,800/- was drawn and paid on 12.01.2018. Also Death cum Gratuity of Rs.5,65,440/- was paid on 05.02.2018. Also leave salary amount of Rs.4,04,800/- was drawn and paid on 12.01.2018. Also Death cum Gratuity of Rs.5,65,440/- was paid on 05.02.2018. Selection Grade arrears, Special Grade arrears and incentive for completion of 30 years were also given. While sanctioning arrears, recommendations of Pay Commissions were taken into account and arrears claimed and paid. 12. As per Rule 23-A of the Tamil Nadu General and Subordinate Service Rules, the Village Administrative Officers are coming under Category 14-A. As adumbrated in Rule 8-A of the above Rules, every person appointed as Village Administrative Officer has to pass the following Tests within the period of their probation:- (1) Powers and duties of Village Administrative Officers. (2) Village Sanitation (3) Manual of Village Accounts. 13. The deceased husband of the writ petitioner Mr.N.Jothilingam was appointed as Village Administrative Officer on 10.08.1982. The husband of the writ petitioner did not pass the Village Sanitation Test till 27.05.2004. Therefore, he was entitled for the sanction of second increment only from the date of completion of probation on the Afternoon of 27.05.2004. Since the Government relaxed the rules in his favour of declaring his probation with effect from the Afternoon of 27.05.2004, action was taken for the sanction of increments notionally upto 27.05.2004 giving monetary effect from 28.05.2004 and arrears to the tune of Rs.9.64, 266/- was drawn and paid through Electronic Communication System on 17.10.2017. Since the delay is on the part of the Village Administrative Officer for his lackadaisical attitude in passing the Test, no interest at 12% per annum can be given, as there is no delay in administrative side. 14. In the instant case, all the demands raised by the writ petitioner have been fulfilled excepting the payment of arrears of pay and allowances for the period from 10.08.1982 to 27.05.2004, since the probation of the individual was declared after 22 years by relaxing the rule in his favour and as the delay was on the part of the individual in not passing the Test within the period of probation and passed the Test belatedly after 22 years, by tentatively arriving at his pay notionally upto 27.05.2004 and giving financial effect with effect from 28.05.2004 and thus all the demands were conceited as prayed for. Regarding the payment of interest at 12% per annum, it is submitted that the writ petitioner is not entitled since the delay was not on the part of the Government. It is submitted that as on date, all the benefits accrued have been settled. 15. Perusal of the counter-affidavit filed by the fifth respondent reveals that the husband of the writ petitioner during the period of probation had not passed the requisite Tests and therefore, there was a delay in declaring his probation. However, the Competent Authority relaxed the rules in favour of the employee and subsequently granted the notional benefits and the financial benefits were given with effect from 28.05.2004. The delay occurred at the instance of the employee concerned, as the deceased husband of the writ petitioner did not pass the requisite Tests and finally the Department relaxed the rule in favour of the deceased husband of the writ petitioner and settled all terminal and pensionary benefits. 16. This being the factum, the relief, as such, sought for in the present writ petition deserves no merit consideration. 17. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.