BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Dated : 05/11/2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU

Avudaiappan, ... Petitioner

Vs

1. The Commissioner,

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department,

119, Uthamar Gandhi Salai,

Nungambakkam,

Chennai - 34.

2. The Joint Commissioner,

Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Department,

Now at Thoothukudi..

3. The Director,, Audit Division,

Hindu Religious and

Charitable Endowment Department,

Chennai - 18.

4. The Deputy Commissioner / Executive Officer,

Arulmigu Sankaranarayanaswamy Thirukovil,

Sankarankovil,

Tenkasi District.. ... Respondents

PRAYER :- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to settle the full retirement benefits of the petitioner with 12 percentage interest from 01.11.2013 till payment on the basis of the 4th respondents letter to the 3rd respondent in Na.Ka. 656/2016/A3 dated

30.09.2024 within a time frame to be stipulated by this Court.

For Petitioner : M/s.Janaki Devi V, For R1 to R3 : Mr.P.Subburaj Special Government Pleader For R4 : Mr.S.Manohar

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking direction to the respondents to settle the full retirement benefits of the petitioner with 12% percentage interest from 01.11.2013 till payment on the basis of the fourth respondent's letter to the third respondent in Na.Ka. 656/2016/A3 dated 30.09.2024.

2. The petitioner, who had superannuated on 31.01.2023, approached this Court for settlement of his terminal benefits. When this matter was taken up for hearing on 15.10.2025, this Court has given a finding that the audit objections which are raised against the petitioner cannot be put against the petitioner and directed the third respondent to disburse the terminal benefits of the petitioner on or before 14.11.2025 and to report compliance on 17.11.2025 and this Court had further restrained the respondents 1 to 4 herein not to draw their salaries for the month of October 2025.

3. However, upon a submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent that payment has already been made to the petitioner from 20.03.2025 to 28.10.2025; thereby all his terminal benefits have been settled, on request, the matter came to be listed before this Court. Hence, the matter was listed on 30.10.2025. On which date, this Court recording the statement made by the learned counsel appearing for the fourth respondent permitted the respondents in the writ petition to withdraw the salary. For better appreciation, the orders dated 15.10.2025 and 31.10.2025 respectively are extracted here under :

15.10.2025 “The petitioner had superannuated as early as in the year 2013 and has not been paid his terminal benefits on the ground that there is an audit objection pending against him.

In W.P(MD)No.13919 of 2023, dated 03.06.2024, this Court recording the aforesaid facts had directed the fourth respondent herein to send reminders to the Finance Committee and get appropriate orders within a period of one month.

2. The contempt petition filed by the petitioner was closed by recording that the fourth respondent herein had complied with the order passed in the writ petition by sending reminders. But unfortunately what has been failed to take note of by the Contempt Court is the direction that the fourth respondent herein should get appropriate orders within a period of one month. Therefore, the order made in W.P(MD)No.13919 of 2023 has not been still complied with even after one year of the order has been passed.

3. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel for the fourth respondent submits that the audit objection raised against the petitioner is still pending. It is to be noted that the audit objection was raised during the service of the petitioner and even after 12 years from the superannuation of the petitioner, the audit Department has not concluded the said audit objection.

4. In view of the same, audit objecti