Chellam.R v. The State Of Tamil Nadu
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 30.10.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD R.Chellam : Petitioner Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Environment and Forests Department, Secretariat, Chennai 9.
2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Jeenis Building, Panagal Maligai, Saidapet, Chennai 600 015.
3.The Chief Conservator of Forests, Tirunelveli Forest Circle, NGO Colony, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.
: Respondents P RAYER:
Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records on the file of the 3rd respondent in connection with the impugned order passed by him vide his proceedings in Se.Mu.Aa.No. Pa1/6531/2018 dated 04.09.2020 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and lack of jurisdiction and consequently direct the 1st and 2nd 1/25
respondents to pay the petitioner salary, increment and other monetary benefits in the post of as Assistant Conservator of Forests from 30.09.2011 to 30.04.2015 and to pay enhanced pension in the light of the order passed by this Honble Court in W.P.(MD).No. 8015 of 2013 dated 08.07.2015 as well as G.O.(D) No.119, Environment & Forests (FR-I) Department dated 15.05.2019.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu For Respondents : Mr.J.K.Jeyaseelan Government Advocate
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed challenging the proceedings of the third respondent in Se.Mu.Aa.No. Pa1/6531/2018 dated 04.09.2020 and for a consequential direction to the first and second respondents to pay the petitioner's salary, increment and other monetary benefits in the post of as Assistant Conservator of Forests from 30.09.2011 to 30.04.2015 and to pay enhanced pension in the light of the order passed by this Honble Court in W.P.(MD).No. 8015 of 2013 dated 08.07.2015 as well as G.O.(D) No.119, Environment & Forests (FR-I) Department dated 15.05.2019.
2. The case of the petitioner is that he was joined in the 2/25
respondent department as Forester on 02.03.1979 and subsequently promoted as Forest Range Officer on 01.07.1998 and promoted to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forests by the first respondent vide G.O. (D)No.119, Environment & Forests (FR-I) Department, dated 15.05.2019, with effect from 2011 and retired from service on 30.04.2015 on attaining superannuation.
3. The petitioner was issued with a Show Cause Notice under Rule 17 (a) by the Deputy Director-cum-Wildlife Warden, Project Tiger, Ambasamudram, vide his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.662/06, dated 29.6.2007, seeking his explanation for the non-plantation of 13,108 saplings in Kanavur, Kadaiyam Range and caused a loss of Rs.1,36,148/- to the Government. But the Show Cause notice was withdrawn by the Member Secretary/Chief Executive Officer, Forest Development Wing, Kalakkadu - Mundanthurai Project Tiger and Deputy Director, Project Tiger, Ambasamudram vide his order in Na.Ka.No.P2/5012/2007 dated 31.08.2007.
4. The petitioner was issued with two more charge memos under 17(b) vide by the proceedings of the Chief Conservator of Forests 3/25
and Field Director, Project Tiger, Tirunelveli, in C.No.E/5849/2006, dated 24.3.2009 and in Na.Ka.No.Pa.2/2025/2009, dated 06.04.2009, by withdrawing one and another. Despite the charge memos were being a baseless one, the petitioner extended his fullest cooperation to the enquiry officer. But the enquiry officer without conducting the enquiry under the due process of law, submitted his report before the second respondent. However, no final order was passed by the second respondent for the past two years from the date of withdrawal of the Enquiry Report.
5. The name of the petitioner was included in the panel for promotion to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forests for the year 2011-12 by the second respondent vide his proceedings in Ref. No.A2/19710/10 dated 12.09.2011 and his name was placed at Serial No.
49. In the said proceedings itself, it was stated that if there is any charge sheet or punishment pending as on date then the same cannot be effected. In view of the pendency of the above charge, the petitioner was not promoted. Therefore, he sent a detailed representation to the second respondent on 03.10.2011 and requested him to drop the charges as they are baseless and promote him to the post of Assistant Conservator of 4/25
Forests along with his batchmates.
6. It is the further case of the petitioner that since the second respondent did not finalize the enquiry and kept it pending for more than four years, he was deprived from getting promotion and therefore, he approached this Court by way of filing a writ petition in W.P.(MD)No. 6491 of 2013 and this Court by order dated 09.04.2013 directed the second respondent to expedite the disciplinary proceedings as early as possible. However, the second respondent issued an order of recovery of Rs.1,95,943/- in 24 equal installments vide his proceedings in Se.Mu.Aanai.No.Aa.Aa3/58545/2007, dated 22.04.2013. 7.The second respondent passed the impugned order of recovery after a lapse of two years and even without conducting a proper enquiry as per the Forest Act, the petitioner challenged the same before this Court in W.P. (MD)No.
8015 of 2013 and prayed for promotion to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forests for the year 2011-2012 and this Court, by order dated 08.07.
of a copy of that order.
8. Thereafter, the respondents preferred an appeal against the said order in W.A.(MD)No.1005 of 2016 and this Court, by order dated 09.12.2016 reserved the order and thereafter, dismissed the writ appeal on 22.12.2016. It is pertinent to note here that though the writ petition as well as the writ appeal preferred by the official respondents ended in his favour and, the respondents had not turned to provide promotion to the petitioner to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forests for the year 2011-2012. Therefore, he was constrained sent contempt notice to the respondents in different occasions and as a consequence the first respondent vide G.O.(D)No.119, Environment & Forests (FR-1) Department, dated 15.05.2019, included the name of the petitioner in the panel for the post of Assistant Conservator of Forests for the year 2011-2012 and fixed his seniority by placing his name in Sl.No.14(A) i.e. below the name of one V.Alagumalai, (Sl.No.14) and his name was already deleted and the name of the petitioner was placed above the name of P.V.Ramasthanumoorthy (Sl.No.15).
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the 6/25
ffirst respondent included the name of the petitioner in the appropriate place of the seniority list of the panel to the promotion to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forests for the year 2011-2012 pursuant to the order of this Court and to his shock and surprise, he was not provided with the salary of Assistant Conservator of Forests and enhanced pension. Therefore, he made several representations dated 12.02.2020, 10.06.2020 and 07.10.2020 to the respondents and requested them to pay salary and increment in the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forests from 2011-2015 on par with his junior namely P.V.Ramasthanumoorthy (Sl.No.15).
He further submit that the charges and subsequent recovery order was passed against the petitioner was quash by this Court by order dated as illegal and moreover, as he was promoted to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forests with retrospective effect from the year 2011, the respondents are duty bound to pay full salary and yearly increments in the post of Assistant Conservator of Forests as paid in the case of his Junior namely, P.V.Ramasthanumoorthy (Sl.No. 15) from 30.06.2011.
10. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the third respondent has passed the present impugned order 7/25
vide proceedings in Se.Mu.Aa.No. Pal/6531/2018, dated 04.09.2020 and he was issued with the pay fixation in the post of Assistant Conservator of Forests and that will be taken only for pension purpose and no salary for those period will not be paid to the petitioner. He would further submit that as the impugned order passed by the third respondent dated 04.09.2020 in violation of the order of this Court passed in W.P.(MD)No. 8015 of 2013 dated 08.07.2015, he filed a contempt petition before this Court in Cont. Petition (MD) No.468 of 2021. The contempt petition came up for hearing on 30.03.2021. The Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the contemnors therein made his submission before this Court that the officials have passed an order and if the petitioner feel aggrieved he has to challenge the order. Based on the submission made by the Government Advocate, this Court had closed the contempt petition by giving a liberty to the petitioner to challenge the same, if aggrieved.
11. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that since the charge memo and subsequent order of recovery passed by the second respondent vide his proceedings in Se.Mu Aanai.No.Aa.Aa. 3/58545/2007, dated 22.04.2013, was quashed by this Court and 8/25
subsequently, he had been promoted to the post of Assistant Conservator of Forests vide G.O.(D)No.119, Environment & Forests (FR-I) Department, dated 15.05.2019, he is entitled for all service and monetary benefits in the post of Assistant Conservator of Forests from the period 30.08.2013 to 30.04.2015. Hence, he has approached this Court by way of filing the present writ petition and prays to allow the writ petition.
12. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents has filed a counter-affidavit of the third respondent, wherein it has been stated as follows:- "8) It is respectfully submitted that the Petitioner Thiru.R. Chellam, Forest Range Officer (Retd..) had filed a writ petition W.P.(MD) No. 8015 of 2013 before the Hon'ble Madurai Bench of Madras High Court a prayer call for the records in Principal Chief Conservator of Forests' Proceedings No. BB3/58545/2007 dated 22.04.2013 to quash the same and promote him as Assistant Conservator of Forests with effect from 2011-2012 with all consequential benefits.
9/25
The Hon'ble Madurai bench of Madras high Court in its direction dated 08.07.2015 on the above said writ petition pronounced the following verdict.
"In the result, the writ petition is allowed, the impugned order of recovery passed by the 2nd respondent (Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Chennai) is set aside. It is made clear that if any amount is recovered from the petitioner, the same shall be refunded to him within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. failing which, the same shall carry interest at the rate of 12% from the date of order till the date of disbursement. Since the impugned order of recovery has been set aside by this court, the petitioner entitled to all other consequential benefits but for the punishment order, which shall be extended to him notionally, as the petitioner has attained the age of superannuation and notional benefits, if any, shall be calculated and paid to the petitioner 10/25
within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this order. No cost. Consequently connected miscellaneous petitions are closed".
9) It is submitted that accordingly as per the Hon'ble Madurai bench of Madras high Court Order 08.07.2015, the impugned Principal Chief Conservator of Forests'
proceedings No.
BB3/ 58545/2007 dated 22.04.2013 has been revised and an order of cancellation of the said order has been issued vide Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Proceedings No. BB3/4692/2015, dated:
19.07.2018. The Government in G.O(D)No.119 E&F(FR-I) Dept., dated:
15.05.2019, approved the petitioner's name in S.No.14(A) of the approved list for the post of Assistant Conservator of Forests in the Tamil Nadu Forest Service for the year 2011-2012.
10) It is submitted that the pay re-fixation has been done notionally in the Cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forests with 11/25
effect from 30.09.2011F.N.on par with date of joining of his Junior by the Chief Conservator of Forests, Tirunelveli vide Proceedings No.E1/6531/2018, dated:
04.09.2020. The re-fixation has been ordered in conformity with the provision of Tamil Nadu Fundamental Rules 27 of 17 which states as follows:- "(17) In case where a Government servant has been overlooked for promotion/ appointment to the next higher post but subsequently promoted/appointed to that higher post after restoration of his original seniority on appeal, his pay shall be fixed on the date of assumption of charge in the higher post on par with the pay of his junior provided he has drawn the same rate of pay as his junior in the lower post from time to time. If he has not drawn the same rate of pay as his junior in the lower post, his pay shall be fixed, on the date of assumption of charge, at the stage at which he would have drawn pay on that date had he been promoted/appointed to the higher post 12/25
along with his junior. In cases where seniority has been restored on or after 19th September 1981, arrears of pay and allowance consequent of fixation of pay shall be admissible with effect from the date of assumption of charge in the higher post; in cases where seniority has been restored prior to 19th September 1981, arrears shall be admissible only with effect from the above date".
"Provided that in case of Government Servants whose names were deferred for inclusion in the panel for promotion to higher post due to pendency of charges, but subsequently included in the same panel on exoneration of the charges after the date of their retirement on superannuation on appeal or review, their pay shall be fixed notionally on the date of their retirement on superannuation at the stage at which they would have drawn, had they been promoted or appointed to the higher post along with their junior for the purpose of pension and other monetary terminal benefit;
13/25
Provided further that in the case of Government Servant whose names were deferred for inclusion in the panel due to pendency of charges and have subsequently died while in service or after retirement from service, the charges shall automatically stand abate. In such cases, the pay shall be fixed notionally on the last date of their service or on the date of the retirement on superannuation, as the case may be, at the stage at which they would have drawn, had they been promoted or appointed to the higher post along with their juniors for the purpose of pension and other monetary terminal benefits".
13. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents would submit that the order passed in W.P.(MD) No. 8015 of 2013, it is clearly stated that the petitioner is entitled to all other consequential benefits but for the punishment order, it shall be extended to the petitioner notionally, as the petitioner has attained the age of superannuation and notional benefits, if any shall be calculated and paid to the petitioner within a period of four months from the date of receipt 14/25
of the order. the pay re-fixation has been done notionally in the cadre of Assistant Conservator of Forests with effect from 30.09.2011 Forenoon on par with date of joining of his junior by the Chief Conservator of Forests, Tirunelveli vide Proceedings No.E1/6531/2018, dated 04.09.2020. The re-fixation has been ordered in conformity with the provision of Tamil Nadu Fundamental Rules 27 of 17.
14. The learned Government Advocate has also submitted a detailed calculation of the monetary benefits which is settled to the petitioner pursuant to the date of his superannuation on 30.04.2015.
15. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
16. The petitioner by placing reliance on the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD) No. 8015 of 2013 dated 08.07.2015 that he is entitled for all services and monetary benefits right from 30.08.2013 to 30.04.2015 and it is pertinent to extract the relevant portion of the order which reads as follows:- "In the result, the writ petition is 15/25
allowed, the impugned order of recovery passed by the 2nd respondent (Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Chennai) is set aside. It is made clear that if any amount is recovered from the petitioner, the same shall be refunded to him within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. failing which, the same shall carry interest at the rate of 12% from the date of order till the date of disbursement. Since the impugned order of recovery has been set aside by this court, the petitioner entitled to all other consequential benefits but for the punishment order, which shall be extended to him notionally, as the petitioner has attained the age of superannuation and notional benefits, if any, shall be calculated and paid to the petitioner within a period of four months from the date of receipt of this order.
No cost. Consequently connected miscellaneous petitions are closed". In the aforesaid order, it is very clear that the petitioner is entitled only for notional benefits and the same shall be extended to him notionally as the petitioner has attained the age of superannuation.
17. Hence, the petitioner cannot claim for all service and monetary benefits in the post of the Assistant Conservator of Forests when the orders passed by this Court clearly states that the petitioner is entitled only for notional benefits since he has attained the age of superannuation. The petitioner got superannuation on 30.04.2015 and the pensionary benefits were paid to him from 01.05.2015 as per details of payments furnished by the learned Government Advocate and the same is extracted hereunder:- 17/25
18/25
19/25
20/25
21/25
22/25
18. Hence, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner is not entitled for salary, increment and other monetary benefits in the post of Assistant Conservator of Forests from 30.09.2011 to 30.04.2015, since this Court in W.P (MD) No.8015 of 2013 dated 08.07.2015 has granted only notional benefits and the petitioner has attained the age of superannuation on 30.04.2015. 23/25
19. In the result, the writ petition stands disposed of with the above observations. No costs.
30.10.2024 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No PKN To 1.The Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu, Environment and Forests Department, Secretariat, Chennai 9.
2.The Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Jeenis Building, Panagal Maligai, Saidapet, Chennai 600 015.
3.The Chief Conservator of Forests, Tirunelveli Forest Circle, NGO Colony, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District.
24/25
J.SATHYA NARAYANA PRASAD , J.
PKN 30.10.2024 25/25