K.Jeyalakshmi v. The District Collector

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.03.2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR K.Jeyalakshmi ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The District Collector, The Collectorate, Tirunelveli District - 627 009.

2.The District Revenue Officer, Tirunelveli District - 627 009.

3.The Sub-Collector/ RDO, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District - 627 009.

4.The Thasildar, Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District.

5.Vaikundam, The Thasildar, Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District.

6.The Principal Accountant General (A and E), Tamil Nadu, 361, Anna Salai, Chennai-600 018.

... Respondents Page No. 1 of 7

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the fourth respondent pertaining to its Proceeding in Letter No.A5/1960/2024 dated 26.12.2025 and quash the same and consequently direct the fourth respondent to re-fix the pay with reference to the both selection grade stages in Junior Assistant as well Assistant respectively and increment passed for the Account Test Part I for Subordinate Service and to grant all arrear monetary benefits and to send the revised pension proposals to the sixth respondent, within a time frame as may be fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.Aayiramk.Selvakumar For R1 to R4 : Mr.B.Ramanathan Additional Government Pleader For R6 : M/s.S.Mahalakshmi ******

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned proceedings bearing reference No.A5/1960/2024 dated 26.12.2025, whereby the claim of the petitioner for award of increments was rejected on the ground of non-regularisation of the service of the petitioner as Zonal Deputy Tahsildar for the period of 3 months and 24 days from 01.05.2006 to 24.08.2006.

Page No. 2 of 7

2. The petitioner is also claiming the award of increments for having passed the Account Test Part I for Subordinate Services and the same was not granted to the petitioner while she was in service. All the disputes have arisen because of the conviction suffered by the petitioner dated 17.06.2016 in Special Case No.30 of 2014 on the file of the Special Court for Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Cases, Tirunelveli, under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The conviction ultimately came to be set aside by this Court in Crl.A.(MD) No.245 of 2016 by judgment dated 14.07.2022.

3. It was thereafter that the petitioner made a claim for release of pensionary benefits and release of other increments such as Selection Grade in the cadre of Junior Assistant as well as Assistant and for release of increment for having passed the Account Test Part I for Subordinate Services, etc. However, the impugned letter came to be issued stating that due to the non-regularisation of a certain period during which the petitioner was placed under suspension, the claim of the petitioner is not considered for want of any relevant provision. Page No. 3 of 7

4. In response to the notice, the fourth respondent has filed a detailed counter affidavit, surprisingly admitting the claim of the petitioner, especially in paragraph 10 of the counter affidavit, which reads as under:

"10) ......

As per the petitioner's representation dated 19.09.2025 the 4th respondents here in have been taking necessary and continuous steps to sanction increments for passing Account test part I and refix the pay and other related monetary benefits (including revised pension proposal) submit to the 6th respondents for approved and sanction. Now the missing of service entries in the service Register of the petitioner has made duleg registered thereafter getting proper orders from the 2nd respondent /District Revenue Officer and the 1st respondent / District Collector, Tirunelveli. As 4th respondent herein has been taking speedy action on the petitioner request regarding the increments and refix the pay and other related monitory benefits including revised pension proposal.

In fact the request of the petitioner herein is genuine and accordance with law. The 4th respondents here in has not refused to sanction the Monetary benefits to the petitioner at any time and at any stage The 5th respondent here in has requested the petitioner to give some more time to prepare the above proposal in procedural manner without any mistake. In this context the petitioner has filed this writ petition before the Hon'ble Court."

5. In the light of the categorical admission made by the fourth respondent in the counter affidavit, this Court does not see any reason to Page No. 4 of 7

examine the matter on merits at this stage. This Court is of the considered view that it would be appropriate, in the interest of the petitioner, who is aged 75 years, to direct the officials to process the case of the petitioner for release of pension and other increments for which the petitioner is otherwise entitled to under law.

6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the first to fourth respondents to process the case of the petitioner for release of increments/Selection Grade and release of pension, etc., for which the petitioner is otherwise entitled to under law, in the light of the admission made by the fourth respondent in his counter affidavit, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.

17.03.2026 JEN NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No To 1.The District Collector, The Collectorate, Tirunelveli District - 627 009.

Page No. 5 of 7

2.The District Revenue Officer, Tirunelveli District - 627 009.

3.The Sub-Collector/ RDO, Cheranmahadevi, Tirunelveli District - 627 009.

4.The Thasildar, Ambasamudram, Tirunelveli District.

Page No. 6 of 7

MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR , J.

JEN 17.03.2026 Page No. 7 of 7