P MUTHIAH Vs. KHADI AND VILLAGE INDUSTRIES BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed the above writ petition praying to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the second respondent relating to Proc. No. 9280/96/e1 dated 25. 3. 2000 and of the first respondent in Na. Ka. No. 74035/c4 (1)/96 dated 08. 5. 2003, to quash the same and to issue consequential directions to the respondents herein to disburse the pensionary and retirement benefits to the petitioner with 18% interest thereon forthwith consequent to his retirement on 31. 01. 2000.

(2.) THE petitioner was employed as Assistant in the respondent Board and was subsequently, promoted as Assistant Khadi Officer and he was permitted to retire from service on 31. 01. 2000 on attaining the age of superannuation. Though a show cause notice was issued to him on 10. 7. 1998 and reply was given on 15. 3. 1999, no orders were passed till the date of retirement and he was permitted to retire. Thereafter, a charge memo was issued to him on 25. 3. 2000. After the retirement, the impugned order has been passed with a direction to recover a sum of of Rs. 20,000/- from the pensionary benefits of the petitioner. This order is impugned in this petition.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was permitted to retire from service without any condition and as such, the order of retirement does not show that the retirement of the petitioner was without prejudice to the pending proceedings. After retirement of a person, no departmental proceedings can be initiated against him except in accordance with the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules' ). He referred to Rule 9 (2) (b) of the Rules, which reads as follows: