ORDER :

(Prayer in Contempt Petition: Contempt Petition filed praying to punish the respondents for disobeying the orders of this court in w.P.No.18336 of 2012 dated 09.09.2014.

Review Petition: Review Petition filed under 47 Rule 1 read with 114 CPC praying to review the order dated 9.09.2014 in W.P. No. 18336 of 2012.)

1. Contempt petition is filed by the writ petitioner with a grievance that the respondents failed to pass necessary orders in the stipulated period of time as granted by this court by order dated 09.09.2014 in W.P.No.18336 of 2012.

2. Review Petition is filed by the Department seeking to review the order dated 09.09.2014 passed in W.P.No.18336 of 2012, stating that the petitioner violated Rule 19 and 20 of the Tamil Nadu Government Servant Conduct Rules. 1973.

3. The writ petitioner is found to have violated the Rules 19 and 20 of the Tamil Nadu Government Servant Conduct Rules, 1973 as he contracted marriage for second time. Under Rule 17-b of Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, charge memo was issued on 20.04.2006. After disciplinary enquiry, the petitioner was awarded the punishment of removal from service and the order of removal is dated 30.03.2009. The Appellate Authority also confirmed the punishment. The petitioner was allowed to retire on 30.04.2006. Petitioner earlier approached this court by filing W.P.No.7922 of 2010, challenging the order dated 30.03.2009 and 12.01.2010. The said writ petition was disposed of remanding the matter to the 2nd respondent to pass fresh orders. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent passed the impugned order dated 19.04.2012 and challenging the same, W.P.No.18336 of 2012 was filed by the petitioner. The said writ petition was allowed and the learned Single Judge set aside the impugned orders directing the respondents to work out the benefits due to the petitioner and pay the same to the petitioner.

4. The ground taken by the writ petitioner in W.P.18336 of 2012 is that after attaining the age of superannuation, his case would come under the provisions of Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978 and that after the date of retirement, no disciplinary action could be initiated against the petitioner except under the Pension Rules.

5. The learned Single Judge, while allowing the writ petition, observed that the action of the 2nd respondent in initiating disciplinary action against the petitioner under Rule 17-b of Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules and serving notice for violating Rule 19 and 20 of the Tamil Nadu Government Servant Conduct Rules, 1973 and not converting the proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, is illegal and the authorities have no right to impose the punishment of removal from service. Holding so, the learned Single Judge quashed the impugned orders dated 30.03.2009, 12.01.2010 and 19.04.2012 and directed the respondents to work out the benefits due to the petitioner and pay the same to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of said order. However, the said order has not been complied with by the respondents. Therefore, the petitioner filed the contempt petition.

6. On the other hand, Review Application is filed seeking to review the order dated 09.09.2014. According to the Review Applicants/Respondents, the writ petitioner has contracted second marriage while his first wife is alive and also suppressed the fact to the department higher authorities. Hence he was awarded punishment of removal from service. It is submitted that the petitioner and his first wife were given enough opportunities to defend their side during the departmental enquiry proceedings regarding bigamy and got the written statement about his satisfaction about the manner in which the enquiry was conducted. But contrary to earlier statement, he alleged that the enquiry officer has not conducted the enquiry in a proper way and he was d