S.RAJASEKARAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed seeking a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the fourth respondent in R.No.NIL/2017, dated 17.07.2017 and quash the same and consequently, direct the respondents to pay interest at the rate of 24% per annum for the belated payments towards the retirement benefits of the petitioner.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was working as Steno-Typist from 09.06.1978 till 22.01.1982 in Town and Country Planning Department and thereafter, he was serving in the Judicial Department from 23.01.1982 in various posts and he rendered his unblemished service for more than 32 years. While he was working as Chief Administrative Officer in District Court, Karur and was going to retire on 31.05.2013 on attaining the age of superannuation, he was suspended by virtue of the order of the fourth respondent in R.No.2303/2013/A1, dated 29.05.2013. Subsequently, a charge memo was issued on 30.04.2014 nearly after a lapse of one year from the date of his suspension. The petitioner participated in the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him and after full-fledged enquiry, the petitioner has been discharged from all the charges levelled against him as per the order of the fourth respondent dated 20.01.2016. Thereafter, he was permitted to retire with retrospective effect from 31.05.2013 on superannuation. When he applied for his retirement benefits to the fourth respondent, a certificate dated 10.03.2016 was issued to the effect that no charges or disciplinary proceedings are pending against the petitioner and also there were no dues to be recovered from him. Thereafter, the retirement benefits have been given to the petitioner on various dates between 23.03.2016 and 02.12.2016.

(3.) It is the main grievance of the petitioner that though the retirement benefits ought to have been granted to him immediately upon his superannuation, the same had been given with a delay of 2 1/2 years and hence, the petitioner is entitled to interest in respect of the retirement benefits as per Rule 45(1-A)(i)(a) of the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978, mandates that interest shall be payable for the period beyond three months from the date of retirement, provided the Government Servant is exonerated from all the charges. Thus, he made a representation to the first respondent on 13.03.2017 and the same was forwarded to the second respondent by letter dated 21.03.2017 and in turn, it was forwarded to the fourth respondent on 11.05.2017 for necessary action, however, the same came to be rejected by virtue of the impugned order dated 17.07.2017. Challenging the same, the petitioner is before this Court.