S VINCENT Vs. REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The facts giving rise to the present writ petitions briefly stated are as follows:- Petitioner joined as Junior Assistant in St. Joseph College, Trichy in 1960 and continued as such till 2.6.1971, when he joined as junior assistant under Madurai Kamaraj University, the respondent herein. Petitioner was promoted as Superintendent on 31.5.1978. Petitioner was suspended from the service by order dated 11.10.91 and on 23.6.1992 punishment was imposed stopping three increments with cumulative effect and he was directed to rejoin the duty. Subsequently, the petitioner preferred appeal to the Syndicate of the University and by order dated 23.11.1993, on the basis of the reservation of the Syndicate, the punishment was reduced to stoppage of two increments without cumulative effect. The petitioner made several representations claiming that period of suspension between 11.10.1991 and 23.6.1992 should be treated as on duty. An order was passed by the respondent on 23.11.1994 treating the period from 11.10.1991 to 7.4.1992 as leave admissable under earned leave and from 8.4.1992 to 28.6.1992 as leave on loss of pay. Thereafter the petitioner was allowed to retire on 30.6.1996. However, the retirement benefits such as pension, gratuity, etc. were not granted immediately, but only a sum of Rs.1,900/- was paid as Provisional Pension. The petitioner made several representations and ultimately since no action was taken, he was forced to issue an Advocates notice on 20.4.1998 which also evoked no response from the respondent. Ultimately the petitioner filed W.P.No.8972 of 1998 seeking for a direction to the respondent to pay interest on belated payment of pension and W.P.No.8973 of 1998 seeking for a direction to the respondent to treat the period of suspension as on duty. Both the writ petitions were disposed of by a common order dated 2.7.1998 directing the University to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 4.8.1997 and to pass appropriate orders. Thereafter by order dated 17.11.1998 the representation of the petitioner was rejected.

(2.) W.P.No.5641 of 1999 has been filed seeking for a direction to pay interest on various amounts payable towards retirement benefits on the ground that such benefits have been paid belatedly and W.P.No.6740 of 1999 has been filed seeking to quash the order rejecting the representation of the petitioner to treat the period of suspension as on duty.

(3.) In the writ petition relating to the question of suspension it has been contended that the Registrar has no jurisdiction to pass the order of suspension or give direction treating the period of suspension as on leave and leave without pay and the Syndicate is the appropriate authority. In the other writ petition it has been contended that since there has been undue delay in payment of retirement benefits, the University should be directed to pay interest.