IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 12.01.2026 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI and WMP.No.1317 of 2026 R.Sadasivam …. Petitioner -Vs-

1.The Chairman cum Managing Director, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board/TANGEDCO, NPKRR Maligai, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.

2.The Chief Engineer (Personnel), Tamil Nadu Electricity Board/TANGEDCO, NPKRR Maligai, No.144, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002.

3.The Superintending Engineer, TEDC/Thiruvannamalai Electricity Distribution Circle, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board/TANGEDCO, Thiruvannamalai, Thiruvannamalai District. …. Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to disburse the petitioner's Special Provident Funds (SPF-G & 2000), Encashment of Earned Leave and Unearned Leave on private affairs, Family benefits Fund Scheme, Family Security Fund Scheme and other Entitlements forthwith for protecting his livelihood.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.R.Jothimanian For Respondents : Mr.C.Manoharan

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to disburse the petitioner's Special Provident Funds (SPF-G & 2000), Encashment of Earned Leave and Unearned Leave on private affairs, Family benefits Fund Scheme, Family Security Fund Scheme and other Entitlements forthwith for protecting his livelihood.

2. Heard the learned counsels on either side. With the consent of both sides, the Writ Petition is taken up for hearing at the admission stage itself.

3. The brief facts of the case is as follows:

3.1. The petitioner was appointed as Switch Board Operator in the year 1984 in the respondent Board and thereafter, promoted as Junior Engineer Grade-I and served in various Distribution Divisions. He attained superannuation on 30.09.2019, however he was not permitted to retire as there was a disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner and a corresponding criminal case was also pending trial against him in the concerned Court. Till date, the petitioner was not permitted to retire from service and none of his retirement benefits including pension have been sanctioned. In order to get the said retirement benefits, the petitioner made several representations on 11.03.2020, 05.08.2020 and 20.04.2024 and since the same were not considered, he has approached this Court by way of filing the present Writ Petition.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that if at all anything to be retained because he was not permitted to retire in view of the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings as well as the criminal case against the petitioner, that can only be the Gratuity and pensionary benefits, but not for the other benefits like Special Provident Funds (SPF-G & 2000), Encashment of Earned Leave and Unearned Leave on private affairs, Family benefits Fund Scheme, Family Security Fund Scheme and other Entitlements. He further submitted that insofar as the other benefits except Pension and Gratuity are concerned, it can be granted to the petitioner even though the employee was not permitted to retire in view of the disciplinary proceedings and pending criminal case against and it is a settled legal proposition in number of decisions. He drew the attention of this Court to the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of “The Superintending Engineer -Vs- A.Venkatesan” in W.A.No.269 of 2020 dated 15.09.2021.

5. Per contra, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents submitted that in view of the serious charges levelled against the petitioner which is pending disciplinary proceedings and also he is facing a criminal case, it may not be justifiable on the part of the respondents to allow the petitioner to retire and therefore, on his superannuation, he was not permitted to retire. In view of the same, the petitioner may not be entitled to get the retirement benefits and if at all, the petitioner is entitled to part of the retirement b