D.SAROJINI Vs. CHAIRMAN,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner's husband was inducted in the respondents Bank in the year 2009 and while in service, he had expired on 02.08.2014. During his service, the petitioner was implicated in a criminal case in FIR No.SPE:CBI:ACE:2009 RC MAI 2009 A0040 for the offence under Section 13(2) r/w 13(l)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, which culminated into filing a charge sheet on 29.10.2013. The petitioner herein was due to retire on 31.10.2013. However by letter dated 30.10.2013, the respondents had informed the petitioner's husband that in view of the pending of the disciplinary proceedings, his service would cease from 31.10.2013 onwards and that he would be entitled to the payment of retirement benefits only after the disciplinary proceedings are concluded and final order is passed. In these circumstances, the petitioner's husband had died on 02.08.2014, when the disciplinary proceedings was still pending. The petitioner herein who is the widow of the employee had given representations on various occasion seeking for settlement of the arrears of her husband's salary as well as for disbursement of the retirement benefits to which there was no proper explanation and hence, the present writ petition has been filed challenging the charge sheet dated 29.10.2013 framed against the petitioner by the respondents bank.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in view of the death of the husband of the petitioner, the criminal proceedings as well as the disciplinary proceedings has abated and therefore, the respondents are bound to disburse the arrears of salaries as well as the retirement benefits to the legal heirs of the employee.

(3.) The learned Counsel appearing for the second respondent on the other hand would submit that owing to the conduct of the petitioner's husband, monetary loss has occurred to the respondents bank and therefore they are entitled to recover the loss from the estate of the legal heirs of the deceased employee.