Madras High Court
B.Meenakshi Sundaram vs The Agriculture Production ... on 6 January, 2022
W.P(MD)No.20363 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.20363 of 2021
B.Meenakshi Sundaram Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Agriculture Production Commissioner,
And Principal Secretary to Government,
Agriculture Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai.
2.The Director of Agriculture,
Chepauk,
Chennai – 5.
3.The Director,
Department of Seed and Organic Certification,
Coimbatore – 13. Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the first
respondent to disburse the petitioner's eligible earned leave salary,
unearned leave on private affairs salary and special P.F funds with an
interest upon considering the petitioner's representations dated
29.04.2021 & 18.06.2021.
For Petitioner :Mr.K.K.Ramakrishnan
For Respondents :Mr.A.Kannan
Additional Government Pleader
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.20363 of 2021
ORDER
The writ petition is filed to direct the first respondent to
disburse the petitioner's eligible earned leave salary, unearned leave on
private affairs salary and special P.F funds with interest, considering the
petitioner's representations dated ,29.04.2021 & 18.06.2021.
2.The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as
Agricultural Officer in Thanjavur on 26.11.1980 and he was promoted as
Assistant Director of Agriculture (Quality Control), Tiruchirappalli in the
year 2007. Subsequently, a case in Crime No.1 of 2011 has been
registered against the petitioner and others for the alleged
misappropriation of funds. Hence, the petitioner was placed under
suspension on 17.05.2011 and he was not allowed to retire on attaining
his age of superannuation, in view of the criminal case pending against
him. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is
entitled for the leave salary, as per the judgment of this Court, reported in
2019 (5) CTC 19. The grievance of the petitioner is that even after he
made several representations before the respondents, the same was not
considered. Hence, he filed this present writ petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.20363 of 2021
3.The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits
that in a criminal case, the petitioner is facing serious allegation of
misappropriation of funds. Since all the documents have been seized by
the investigating agency, they have not proceeded with the departmental
proceedings. Only on conclusion of the departmental proceedings, the
petitioner is entitled for any relief as claimed by the petitioner.
4. This Court paid its anxious consideration to the rival
submissions made and also perused the materials placed on record.
5.The petitioner is facing criminal case in Crime No.1 of
2011 and the criminal case is yet to be concluded. Since the documents
have been seized by the investigating agency, the departmental
proceedings initiated against the petitioner could not be concluded. 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:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.20363 of 2021
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
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.20363 of 2021
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
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,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.20363 of 2021
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.In view of the order passed by the Division Bench of this
Court as stated supra, even the dismissed employee is entitled for the
leave salary. More so, 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. Therefore, the respondent is
liable to pay the eligible earned leave salary, unearned leave on private
affairs salary and special P.F funds with interest to the petitioner.
7.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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.20363 of 2021
8.With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of.
No costs.
06.01.2022
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
vrn
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 Agriculture Production Commissioner,
And Principal Secretary to Government,
Agriculture Department,
Fort St.George, Chennai.
2.The Director of Agriculture,
Chepauk,
Chennai – 5.
3.The Director,
Department of Seed and Organic Certification,
Coimbatore – 13.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P(MD)No.20363 of 2021
B.PUGALENDHI, J
vrn
Order made in
W.P(MD) No.20363 of 2021
06.01.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
