A.Pannerselvam v. The District Collector
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.06.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN and WMP.Nos.20188 & 20189 of 2025 A.Pannerselvam ... Petitioner Vs.
The District Collector Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri.
... Respondent Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of Ceriorarified Mandamus, calling for the records on the fie of the Respondent herein relating to proceedings No 12244 / 2017 / A1 dated 07.08.2017 issued by the Respondent herein, quash the same and to issue consequential directions to the Respondent herein to peacefully retire the petitioner from service w.e.f the date of his superannuation ie., on 30.04.2011 and to disburse the entire retirement and pensionary benefits along with interest for the delayed payments within a limited time frame as deemed fit by this Honble Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.I.Kabilan For Respondent : Mr.R.U.Dinesh Raj Kumar Additional Government Pleader ***** 1/5
O R D E R
The instant writ petition has been filed seeking the relief of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records on the fie of the Respondent herein relating to proceedings No 12244 / 2017 / A1 dated 07.08.2017 issued by the Respondent herein, quash the same and to issue consequential directions to the Respondent herein to peacefully retire the petitioner from service w.e.f the date of his superannuation ie., on 30.04.2011 and to disburse the entire retirement and pensionary benefits along with interest for the delayed payments within a limited time frame as deemed fit by this Honble Court.
2. Heard Mr.I.Kabilan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.R.U.Dinesh Raj Kumar, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was served as a Tahsildar in Krishnagiri District. While he was in service, he was arrested in a Trap case under Prevention of Corruption Act. Thereafter, in a trial proceedings, he was convicted by order dated 07.08.2017. 2/5
In pursuance thereof, the respondent has removed the petitioner from service. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that challenging the order of the Trial Court, he preferred an appeal before this Court in Crl.A.No.201 of 2017, wherein this Court has set aside the order of conviction vide order dated 10.01.2024. In spite of setting aside the conviction order dated 10.01.2024, the respondent did not come forward to settle the petitioner's terminal benefits and other entitlements. The learned counsel would also submit that he has sent various representations on 31.01.2025, 10.03.2025 and 08.04.2025 and the same are pending.
4. Per contra, the learned Special Government Pleader would submit that though Crl.A.No.201 of 2017 ended in favour of the petitioner, still the State is entitled to prefer an appeal, Therefore, subject to filing of appeal, they would consider the representations of the petitioner.
5. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner would invite the attention of this Court about the letter dated 03.07.2024 of DGP, wherein, they informed that they are not preferring any appeal against the order of this Court passed in Crl.A.No.201 of 2017.
3/5
6. However, this Court does not want to go into the merits of the matter as the petitioner has come up with the limited prayer to consider his representations.
7. In view of the above, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondent to consider the petitioner's representations and pass orders, within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order according to it's own merits and in accordance with law.
8. In the result, this writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected WMPs are also closed.
05.06.2025 kmi Index :Yes/No Speaking Order NCC: Yes/No To The District Collector, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri.
4/5
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
kmi 05.06.2025 5/5