G VANI Vs. REGISTRAR HIGH COURT CHENNAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. R. Subramanian for the Petitioner and Mr. L. S. M. Hasan Fizal, Government Advocate, for the Respondent.

(2.) THE question in this writ petition relates to payment of pension to the family members of the deceased employee, who was working in the State Judiciary. During his tenure in service, a disciplinary proceedings had been initiated and some of the charges against him had been found to be proved. Ultimately, the High Court on its administrative side passed an order of removal from service. Such order of removal was challenged by the Officer concerned by filing W. P. No. 1832 of 1986. During pendeny of such writ petition, the officer expired on 17. 12. 1995 and the legal representatives were brought on record. Subsequently, by order dated 17. 3. 1999, the High Court in its judicial side had observed that no order of removal could have been passed by the High Court on its administrative side as the order could have been passed only by the appointing authority, namely, the Governor. Thus, setting aside the order of removal from service, the High Court remitted the matter to the High Court in its administrative side to consider as to what further action has to be taken in the disciplinary proceedings. Thereafter, the High Court in its administrative side, passed an order on 8. 8. 2000 to the following effect:

(3.) IN normal course, in the writ petition praying for issuing writ of mandamus, we would have simply disposed of the matter by observing that the petitioners can receive the amount under protest and challenge the order relating to calculation of pension. However, we find that the matter has remained pending for a long period, even though the officer concerned has died more than 18 years back and it would be travesty of justice if the matter would not be finalised at this stage.