Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from disciplinary proceedings initiated against a Head Constable of S.S.Kottai Police Station, Sivagangai District, based on a complaint given by one Ganesan, Captain, Indian Army. Pending disposal of those proceedings, the respondent was placed under suspension and not permitted to retire despite attaining the age of superannuation on 31.12.2009. Aggrieved, he filed W.P.(MD)No.1258 of 2020 before the Madras High Court, which, after noting the long pendency of disciplinary proceedings since 2007, allowed the writ petition, quashed the pending proceedings, and directed the authorities to disburse all monetary and service benefits without reference to the charge-memo. The State of Tamil Nadu and police authorities thereafter preferred the present writ appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside that judgment dated 6.2.2020. During the three-year pendency of the appeal, the Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai, issued proceedings dated 6.10.2022 permitting the respondent to retire from service subject to the outcome of the writ petition. When the writ petition came up for final disposal, this fact was brought to the notice of the court and recorded. Subsequently, the learned counsel for the respondent reported that pursuant to the retirement order dated 6.10.2022, the respondent had received all monetary and retirement benefits and was being paid his monthly pension regularly. The core legal issue before the Division Bench was whether the writ appeal survived for any further adjudication after the underlying relief had been fully implemented through retirement and payment of all benefits. The appellant State sought reversal of the Single Judge's order, while the respondent's counsel informed the court that all dues had been settled and pension was being paid. The Division Bench, comprising Dr. Justice G. Jayachandran and Justice R. Poornima, heard the counsel on both sides and perused the materials. The court observed that once the respondent had been allowed to retire and had received all monetary and retirement benefits including regular monthly pension, the grievance that formed the basis of the writ petition stood fully redressed. Consequently, no live controversy remained for the appellate court to decide, and the court did not enter into the merits of the disciplinary proceedings or the correctness of the Single Judge's order. Accordingly, the writ appeal was dismissed as nothing survived for further adjudication, with no order as to costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Writ Appeal - Infructuous Proceedings - Letters Patent (Madras High Court), Clause 15 - The State filed a writ appeal against the order quashing disciplinary proceedings and directing payment of all monetary and service benefits without reference to the charge-memo. During pendency of the appeal, the respondent was allowed to retire and received all monetary and retirement benefits, including monthly pension, pursuant to proceedings dated 6.10.2022. Held that nothing survived for further adjudication, and the writ appeal was dismissed with no costs, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed (Paras 3-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the writ appeal against the Single Judge's order quashing disciplinary proceedings and directing monetary/service benefits survives after the respondent was allowed to retire and all benefits and pension were disbursed
Final Decision
Writ appeal dismissed as nothing survives for further adjudication; no costs; connected miscellaneous petition closed
Law Points
- Writ appeal rendered infructuous when employee retires and receives all monetary and retirement benefits
- disciplinary proceedings quashed
- pension regularly paid
- no further adjudication survives
