Disposed

Balasubramanian v. The Secretary to Government

Madras HC22 Feb 2024WP(MD)/2078/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Retired government employee suspended days before retirement sought relieving order from 30.11.2011 and retirement benefits. Disciplinary proceedings later ended with charges not proved. Court directed the Secretary to consider his representation subject to vigilance commission ratification within twelve weeks.

What did the court decide?

First respondent directed to consider petitioner's representation, subject to vigilance commission ratification, within twelve weeks.

Balasubramanian Vs The Secretary to Government — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

WP.(MD).No.2078 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

Dated : 22.02.2024

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI

¶6

W.P.(MD)No.2078 of 2024

Balasubramanian

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Secretary to Government, Revenue, Administration and Disaster Management, St.George Fort, Chennai.

¶11

2.The Commissioner, Revenue, Administration and Disaster Management, Ezhlilagam, Chepak, Chennai.

¶12

3.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai. ... Respondents

¶13

PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent to issue relieving order to the petitioner with effect from the date of superannuation dated 30.11.2011 and consequently direct the respondents to provide retirement benefits and other monetary benefits to the petitioner.

¶14

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶15

1/5

¶16

WP.(MD).No.2078 of 2024

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.N.Jeyaram Sidharth For Respondents : Mr.S.Shaji Bino Special Government Pleader

¶18

ORDER

¶19

By consent of both parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

¶20

2.This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, seeking to direct the third respondent to issue relieving order to the petitioner with effect from the date of superannuation dated 30.11.2011 and consequently direct the respondents to provide retirement benefits and other monetary benefits to the petitioner.

¶21

3 .The brief facts which are necessary for the disposal of this Writ Petition is as follows:-

¶22

The petitioner was appointed in the post of Junior Assistant in the third respondent office on 08.05.1982. Later he was promoted as Assistant in the year 1992. While in service, in the post of Assistant, he was suspended before two days of his retirement. Hence, he filed a Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.7891 of 2019 and this Court disposed of the same by directing the respondents to

¶23

2/5

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

WP.(MD).No.2078 of 2024

¶26

conclude the disciplinary proceedings within a period of four weeks. Pursuant to the same, the third respondent had completed two disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner and passed an order relieving the petitioner from charges levelled against him as “charges not proved”. Subsequently, the petitioner made a representation to the respondents to provide the order of retirement along with retirement benefits on 09.08.2021. However, the same was not considered. Hence, this Writ Petition came to be filed.

¶27

4.When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Special Government Pleader circulated the proceedings of the District Collector, Sivagangai dated 08.03.2022, addressed to the Chief Secretary of Revenue Department and Disaster Management informing that the delinquents were relieved without prior ratification of the vigilance commission.

¶28

5 .Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents and carefully perused the entire materials available on record.

¶29

3/5

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

WP.(MD).No.2078 of 2024

¶32

6.Recording the aforesaid submission, this Court hereby

¶33

direct the first respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner subject to the ratification from the vigilance commission and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶34

7.In view of the above, this Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶35

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶36

22.02.2024

¶37

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes Mrn To 1.The Secretary to Government, Revenue, Administration and Disaster Management, St.George Fort, Chennai. 2.The Commissioner, Revenue, Administration and Disaster Management, Ezhlilagam, Chepak, Chennai.

¶38

3.The District Collector, Sivagangai District, Sivagangai.

¶39

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶40

4/5

¶41

WP.(MD).No.2078 of 2024

¶42

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

¶43

Mrn

¶44

W.P.(MD)No.2078 of 2024

¶45

22.02.2024

¶46

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶47

5/5

Balasubramanian v. The Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balasubramanian v. The Secretary to Government

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Soundararajan.a Vs The Controlling Authority/Deputy Commissioner of Labour

Karthick.K Vs The Director

Sathish Kumar. M Vs The Managing Director

P.Kundhavai Devi Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

Arokiasamy.a Vs The Director of School Education

M.Palanisamy Vs P.Senthilkumar