IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Reserved on : 20.11.2025 Pronounced on : 28.11.2025 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.VINOD KUMAR W.P.No . 30916 of 2019 N.Krishnan ... Petitioner vs

1. The Principal Secretary to Government, Highways Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

2. The Chief Engineer, Tamil Nadu Highways Department, Chepauk, Chennai – 600 005. … Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order issued by the first respondent in Letter No.11172/HK2/2018-12 dated 10.10.2019 and to quash the same and consequently direct the first respondent to pay interest on all the belated payments of terminal benefits in the light of the orders issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of S.K.Dua Vs. State of Haryana (2008 (3) SCC

44), within a reasonable period as may be fixed by this Court and to pass orders.

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Ranganathan For Respondents : Mrs.V.Yamunadevi Special Government Pleader

O R D E R

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents and perused the records.

2. The case of the petitioner in brief is that, he was working as Chief Engineer, Highways Department; and that in normal course, he would have retired from service on 30.06.2003, on attaining the age of superannuation; that first respondent placed him under suspension vide G.O.(D).No.75, Highways (HL.1) Department dated 30.06.2003 i.e., on the last day of his service and did not allow him to retire; that the first respondent by placing him under suspension, ordered investigation alleging he is in “possession of wealth disproportionate to known source of income”; that the aforesaid investigation ordered was dropped on 06.12.2006, under GO (D).No.282; and that he was permitted to retire with effect from 30.06.2003 under G.O.

(D).No.149 dated 07.06.2007.

3. It is the further case of the petitioner that but for the investigation ordered by the first respondent charging the petitioner of possessing the wealth disproportionate to known source of income on the last day of his service, the petitioner would have retired from service and got all his pensionary benefits, which on account of being placed under suspension, were denied and paid, only after dropping of charges and being allowed to retired under G.O.(D).No.149 dated 07.06.2007 by revoking his suspension; that the retiral benefits in the form of GPF, SPF, Commutation, Encashment of E.L/PA and pension arrears (Pension and Subsistence allowances) were paid to the petitioner only in the year 2007-2008; and that the first respondent having ordered investigation, without any basis and having denied the petitioner of retirement on attaining the age of superannuation and delaying the payment of retiral benefits for a period of 3-4 years, is liable to pay the interest on the sums due to the petitioner, as only on account of the aforesaid action of the respondents, the petitioner has been subjected to undue harassment and misery.

4. The petitioner further contended that since the non-payment of retirement benefits for a period of 3-4 years, is on account of false accusation levelled against him, the respondents are liable to pay interest on the belated payment of retiral benefits.

5. It is the further case of the petitioner that since, the respondents delayed the payment of retiral benefits caused due to the action of the respondent, he had approached the 1^st respondent and submitted representation dated 25.05.2018, seeking for sanction of interest and as the said representation did not elicit any response, he had submitted another representation dated 16.07.2018, for sanction of interest as admissible under Rule 45-A of Tamil Nadu Pension Rules.

6. The petitioner further contended that since the representation submitted by him did not evoke any positive response from the respondents by