Madras High Court
B.Muthukrishnan vs The Joint Registrar on 6 January, 2022
W.P(MD)No.2555 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 06.01.2022
CORAM :
THE HON`BLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
W.P(MD) No.2555 of 2021
B.Muthukrishnan Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Joint Registrar,
Ramanathapuram District Consumer,
Co-operative Wholesale Store Ltd,
(RAMCO),
District Collector Complex,
Ramanathapuram,
Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Deputy Registrar/Managing Director,
Ramanathapuram District Consumer
Co-operative Wholesale Store Ltd.,
(RAMCO),
Vandikkara Street,
Ramanathapuram,
Ramanathapuram District.
3.The General Manager,
Ramanathapuram District Consumer
Co-operative Wholesale Store Ltd.,
(RAMCO),
Vandikkara Street,
Ramanathapuram,
Ramanathapuram District. Respondents
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.2555 of 2021
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call
for the records in e.f.vz; 4499/2019-g.gp.1 dated, 14.05.2020 passed by the
second respondent herein and quash the same as illegal and consequently
direct the respondents 1 to 3 to disburse retirement benefits of the
petitioner in accordance with law, within time stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner :Mr.D.Balamurugapandi
For R1 :Mr.A.Kannan,
Additional Government Pleader
For R2 & R3 :Mr.S.Seenivasagam
ORDER
The writ petition is filed to quash the impugned order passed
by the second respondent in e.f.vz; 4499/2019-g.gp.1 dated, 14.05.2020,
holding the petitioner's retirement benefits, even after his retirement on
31.05.2019, on the ground that a criminal case is pending against him, in
Crime No.336 of 2014.
2.The case of the petitioner is that he was working as
Salesman under the respondents. During his tenure, a criminal case has
been registered as against the petitioner in Crime No.336 of 2014, for the
alleged offence that he supplied kerosine to the family card holders, who
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.2555 of 2021
are having gas connection. He retired from service on 31.05.2019 on
attaining superannuation. The grievance of the petitioner is that by the
impugned order, though the petitioner was allowed to retire on his
attaining superannuation on 31.05.2019, the respondents have not
disbursed his retirement benefits, even after his retirement, on the ground
that a criminal case is pending against him. The learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that though the respondent has issued charge memo,
they have not concluded the enquiry so far, by referring the criminal case
pending against the petitioner.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the respondents 2 & 3
submits that a criminal case is pending against the petitioner in Crime
No.336 of 2014 and thereby, the departmental proceedings has not been
concluded. The representation submitted by the petitioner has also been
suitably replied. Hence, the petitioner has come up with the present writ
petition.
4. This Court paid its anxious consideration to the rival
submissions made and also perused the materials placed on record.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.2555 of 2021
5.The petitioner's retirement benefits have not been
disbursed to him even after his retirement on 31.05.2019, in view of the
pendency of a criminal case as against him. The departmental
proceedings initiated against the petitioner could not be concluded due to
pendency of the criminal case. It is to be noted that pendency of a
criminal case cannot be a bar to proceed with the departmental
proceedings. It is brought to the knowledge of this Court that even the
dismissed employee is entitled for the leave salary as per the judgment of
the Division Bench of this Court, reported in 2019 (5) CTC 19, wherein,
it was held as follows:
13.Perusal of the above said Rule and the Explanation
would show that even a Government servant, whose
service is either terminated by Notice or has been
compulsorily retired from service as a measure of
punishment and where the service of such Government
Servant has been extended beyond the date of
superannuation, of-course in the interest of public
service, is certainly entitled for encashment of leave on
private affairs.
14.In other words, it is to be noted that even a person,
who is dismissed from service, is also entitled to the
encashment of Leave salary. If that being case, we do
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.2555 of 2021
not find any logic behind the contention of the
Appellant as if such amount can be paid only after the
termination of the proceedings. In other words, there
must be a specific reason with object for retention of
the said sum, pending Disciplinary proceedings. What
the Government Servant is entitled to even at the worst
scenario of dismissal of his service, cannot be denied to
be paid on his request, merely because, his service is
retained.
15.There are two types of monetary benefits payable to
a Government Servant on retirement. One type of such
benefits, such as Earned Leave, Provident Fund and
Special Provident Fund amount, is a benefit already
accrued and got credited to the account of the
Employee, which he is entitled to receive automatically
on attaining superannuation. Those amounts become
his personal property. It makes no difference even if he
is not permitted to retire and a Departmental
proceedings is initiated against him. In other words,
those amounts are derived out of like his ''savings'' and
therefore, the Employer cannot stake any claim or
impose any restriction as to when such amount could
be paid to the Employee even after attaining the age of
superannuation. In other words, even as per Rules,
these amounts are payable either on the date of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.2555 of 2021
superannuation or on the date of termination of
extension of service. Such payment is to be made even
to a person dismissed from service. When such being
the position, there cannot be any justification on the
part of the Employer to retain the said sum by citing
the pendency of proceedings.
16.The other type of Monetary benefit payable to an
Employee on his retirement, such as pension, gratuity,
etc., is certainly not liable to be paid automatically on
the person attaining superannuation, if the said person
is not permitted to retire on the other hand,
proceedings are initiated against him and the same is
pending. The outcome of such proceedings will
certainly have a bearing on the entitlement to get or
liability to pay such amount. Therefore, the person,
who attained the age of superannuation and not to
allow retire, based on pendency of the Disciplinary
proceedings, cannot expect the Employer to make the
payment of Pension and Gratuity, etc., even before the
proceedings gets terminated, since such liability is
depending upon the outcome of such proceedings.
6.As per the order passed by the Division Bench of this
Court as stated supra, even the dismissed employee is entitled for the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.2555 of 2021
leave salary. Hence, the respondent shall proceed with the departmental
proceedings and conclude the same within a period of three months from
the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Even, if the petitioner is found
to be guilty, the petitioner is entitled for leave salary and other benefits as
per dictum laid down by the Division Bench of this Court as stated
above. The benefits such as, Earned Leave, Provident Fund and Special
Provident Fund amount, is a benefit already accrued and got credited to
the account of the Employee, which he is entitled to receive
automatically on attaining superannuation. In view of the above, the
respondent shall pay all the eligible terminal benefits to the petitioner,
within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order.
7.With the above observations and directions, the writ
petition is disposed of. No costs.
06.01.2022
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
vrn
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.2555 of 2021
Note:
In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web
copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that
the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the
responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
To
1.The Joint Registrar,
Ramanathapuram District Consumer,
Co-operative Wholesale Store Ltd,
(RAMCO),
District Collector Complex,
Ramanathapuram,
Ramanathapuram District.
2.The Deputy Registrar/Managing Director,
Ramanathapuram District Consumer
Co-operative Wholesale Store Ltd.,
(RAMCO),
Vandikkara Street,
Ramanathapuram,
Ramanathapuram District.
3.The General Manager,
Ramanathapuram District Consumer
Co-operative Wholesale Store Ltd.,
(RAMCO),
Vandikkara Street,
Ramanathapuram,
Ramanathapuram District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.2555 of 2021
B.PUGALENDHI, J
vrn
Order made in
W.P(MD) No.2555 of 2021
06.01.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
