R NEERATHILINGAM Vs. DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short point for consideration in this Writ Petition is whether the departmental proceedings can be initiated under Rule 9(2)(b)(i) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules'), after the retirement of a government servant in respect of any event which had taken place more than four years before the issuance of charge memo.

(2.) The petitioner worked as Inspector of Police and retired on 31.08.2004 on attaining the age of superannuation and he was also allowed to retire. Thereafter a memorandum of charges was issued by the respondent on 08.11.2008 on the ground of dereliction of duty during the period from 05.05.2003 to 24.08.2004 as stated in the charges mentioned in the annexure-I to the memorandum of charges. Therefore, the petitioner filed the writ petition challenging the charge memo on the ground that charge memo is illegal and it is against the Rule 9(2)(b)(i) of the Rules.

(3.) The respondent filed a counter stating that sanction for initiating departmental proceedings against the petitioner was granted by the government in G.O.(3D)No.85 Home (POL-IV) department dated 15.10.2007 and as the sanction was granted before the expiry of four years from the date in respect of which action has been taken and sanction was also granted within a period of four years from the date of retirement, the memorandum of charges is perfectly valid as per Rule 9(2)(b)(i) of the Rules. It is further stated that grant of sanction is a condition precedent for initiating proceedings and as the sanction was granted within the time frame stipulated under Rule 9(2)(b)(i) of the Rules, the initiation of proceedings is perfectly valid.