M VELAYUTHAM Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION AND WATER SUPPLY DEPARTMENT CHENNAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a retired Sanitary Inspector, Chengalpet Muncipality, Chengalpet. While in service, he was issued with a charge memo dated 21.07.1994 by the Commissioner, Chengalpet Municipality, for certain allegations pertaining to the year 1993. He submitted his explanation to the charges on 25.07.1994. As he was due to retire on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.07.1994, he was permitted to retire without prejudice to the disciplinary proceedings.

(2.) IT is the further case of the petitioner that though he submitted his explanation to the charge memo without any delay on 25.07.1994, the Government called for further explanation only on 20.11.2001, after expiry of seven years from the date of his retirement. He submitted his further explanation on 24.12.2001 and not accepting the same, charges were held as proved and a penalty of cut in pension of Rs.100/- for one year was imposed on 20.05.2002.

(3.) OPPOSING the relief sought for in this writ petition and reiterating the contentions made in the counter affidavit filed by the Director, Local Fund Audit, Chennai, the 2nd"respondent herein, Mr.S.V.Durai Solai Malai, learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner on 21.07.1994 and as the petitioner was due to retire on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.07.1994, he was permitted to retire pending disposal of the disciplinary proceedings. He was sanctioned provisional pension vide letter No.R.Dis.No.PV(6)/19392/96, dated 14.05.1996 of the Director of Local Fund Audit, Chennai. He further submitted that the Government have called for further explanation from the petitioner, and the same was submitted on 24.12.2001. As the charges were held proved, the Government by its letter dated 08.04.2002, called for the petitioner's further explanation against the proposed penalty of cut in pension of Rs.100/- per month, for one year. After considering the petitioner's explanation dated 20.04.2002, the Government imposed the punishment of cut in pension of Rs.100/- per month, for one year vide G.O.(D)No.182, M&WS(ME-III) Department, dated 20.05.2002. He further submitted that regular pension proposals of the petitioner were received by the Director of Local Fund Audit, Chennai only on 01.12.2003 vide letter No.3512/C1/2003 dated 27.11.2003 of the Commissioner, Chengalpet Municipality and immediately on receipt of the proposals, pensionary benefits were sanctioned by the 2nd"respondent on 13.02.2004.