Madras High Court
M.Ramasamy vs The Government Of Tamil Nadu on 24 August, 2022
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam
WP No.33700 of 2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 24-08-2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
WP No.33700 of 2014
And
MP No.1 of 2014
M.Ramasamy .. Petitioner
vs.
1.The Government of Tamil Nadu,
Represented by Secretary to Government,
Revenue Department,
Secretariat,
Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Principal Secretary and Commissioner of
Survey and Settlement,
Survey House, Chepauk,
Chennai – 600 005.
3.The Additional Director of Survey and Land Records,
Directorate of Survey and Settlement,
Chepauk,
Chennai – 600 005.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP No.33700 of 2014
4.The Assistant Directorate of Survey and Land Records,
Salem. .. Respondents
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
records of the fourth respondent in Pro.Na.Ka.No.A3/3592/2014 dated
18.08.2014, to quash the same and to issue consequential direction to the
fourth respondent to regularise the period of suspension of the petitioner from
28.12.1992 to 19.09.2007 as 'duty' and further direct the first respondent to
regularise the period from 20.09.2007 to 25.09.2007 as period of
'Compulsory Wait' and to fix or revise the pensionary benefits of the
petitioner on that basis and disburse all consequential monetary benefits with
12% compound interest.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Ravi for
Mr.M.Ravi.
For Respondents-1 to 4 : Mr.L.S.M.Hasan Fizal,
Additional Government Pleader.
ORDER
The order impugned regulating the period of suspension as leave eligible and as compulsory wait, is under challenge in the present writ 2/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No.33700 of 2014 petition.
2. The petitioner was initially appointed as Field Surveyor in the Survey and Land Records Department. He was promoted to the post of Sub Inspector of Survey and was placed under suspension on 28.12.1992 on the ground of contemplation of departmental disciplinary proceedings. The proceedings were transferred to the Tribunal for departmental disciplinary proceedings, Salem and a charge sheet was issued and an enquiry was conducted and the petitioner demanded his case.
3. The Tribunal for departmental disciplinary proceedings submitted a Final Report and based on the said report, the final orders are passed by the Government and thereafter, an order of suspension was revoked and the petitioner was reinstated in service.
4. The fact remains that the petitioner was subjected to departmental disciplinary proceedings and his case was referred to the Tribunal for departmental disciplinary proceedings and therefore, there was a 3/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No.33700 of 2014 long delay in concluding the proceedings and the period of suspension thus was regulated by the Competent Authority as leave eligible and the Earned Leave, Unearned Leave on Private Affairs and certain portion of the period as Leave on Loss of Pay and Compulsory Wait.
5. In view of the fact that the period of suspension was regulated as Earned Leave, Unearned Leave on Private Affairs and Leave on Loss of Pay and Compulsory Wait. The petitioner was subsequently allowed to retire from service and the terminal and retirement benefits were also settled. The period of suspension cannot be regulated as duty, since the Competent Authority finally imposed the penalty of cut in pension. Since the departmental disciplinary proceedings ended with an order of punishment, the petitioner is not entitled to regulate the period of suspension as duty eligible leave period. Only in the event of exoneration, the petitioner would be eligible to claim that the period of suspension is to be treated as duty but not otherwise.
6. In the present case, it is not in dispute that the petitioner 4/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No.33700 of 2014 suffered the punishment and thus the entire period of suspension cannot be regulated as duty.
7. This being the factum established, this Court do not find any infirmity in respect of the order passed by the Competent Authority regulating the period of suspension as Earned Leave, Unearned Leave on Private Affairs, Leave on Loss of Pay and Compulsory Wait, as the case may be.
8. Thus the writ petition is devoid of merits and stands dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.
24-08-2022 Index : Yes/No. Internet : Yes/No. Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order.
Svn To
1.The Secretary to Government, Government of Tamil Nadu, Revenue Department, Secretariat, 5/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP No.33700 of 2014 Chennai – 600 009.
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Svn
2.The Principal Secretary and Commissioner of Survey and Settlement, Survey House, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.
3.The Additional Director of Survey and Land Records, Directorate of Survey and Settlement, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005.
4.The Assistant Directorate of Survey and Land Records, Salem.
WP 33700 of 2014 24-08-2022 6/6 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis