B. KULAMANI Vs. GOVT. OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been instituted challenging the legality and validity of the order passed on 17.02.2011 by the Accountant General (A & E), Anna Salai, Chennai, declaring the net qualifying service put in by the writ petitioner was only nine years six months and twenty four days and hence, the benefit of additional qualifying length of service provided for under Rule 27 of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, does not arise in his case for consideration.

(2.) The relevant facts for the purpose of deciding the issue are: The writ petitioner was selected and appointed as a Civil Judge (Junior Division) on 27.11.1995. While he was working as such at Nangunari, he was placed under suspension on 13.06.2005 as serious allegations of corrupt practices indulged in by him have surfaced and also for various other acts of impropriety and mis-conduct attributable to him. While he was kept under suspension, the need to review his case upon attaining the age of fifty years has arisen.

(3.) The High Court upon a proper and careful analysis of the service profile and the quality of his services thus, far rendered had formed an opinion that it was necessary in public interest to compulsorily retire the writ petitioner in terms and in accordance with Rule 56(2) of the Fundamental Rules. The recommendation made by the High Court has been accepted and accordingly, the State Government passed orders through their G.O.(2D) No.458, Home (Cts.IA) Department, dated 107.2007, retiring the writ petitioner in public service by tendering three months of pay and allowances in lieu of three months notice.