BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Date of Reserving the Order Date of Pronouncing the Order

28.11.2025 30.01.2026 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU W.P.(MD) No.22528 of 2024 &

W.M.P.No.19060 of 2024 Dr.M.Rajendran ... Petitioner -vs-

1.The Accountant General of Tamilnadu, Office of the Accountant General, Chennai – 600 018.

2.The Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Madurai Region, Palam Station Road, Madurai – 625 002, Madurai District.

3.The Special Officer, Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Thevar College, Usilampatti – 625 532, Madurai District. ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the 1^st respondent herein in No.P16/1/11633616/ADK/162, dated 06.09.2024, quash the same, further direct the respondents herein to sanction and disburse forthwith Pension, Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity (DCRG), Earned Leave benefits, Leave on Private Affairs benefits and other retiral benefits with appropriate interest and pass such further suitable order.

For Petitioner : Ms.A.Amala for Mr.V.Jeyaprakash For Respondents : Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar AGP for R2 Mr.P.Gunasekaran for R1

O R D E R

This Writ Petition had been filed to quash the impugned proceedings issued by the 1^st respondent, dated 06.09.2024, and to direct the respondents herein to sanction and disburse forthwith Pension, Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity (DCRG), Earned Leave benefits, Leave on Private Affairs benefits and other retiral benefits with appropriate interest

2. Heard Ms.A.Amala, learned counsel appearing for Mr.V.Jeyaprakash the learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner Mr.P.Gunasekaran, learned counsel appearing for the first respondent and Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the second respondent.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner had superannuated as an Associate Professor from the third respondent college on 31.05.2024 by proceedings dated 19.07.2024. The second respondent had sanctioned a Pension and Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity and was also forwarded to the first respondent. But however, the first respondent had returned the proposal indicating that a criminal case against the petitioner is pending. She would further submit that the above said criminal case was at the instance of the rival faction of the society which manages the third respondent institution. She would further submit that having permitted the petitioner to superannuate from service, the terminal benefits cannot be withheld. She would submit that the same could be withheld only if the petitioner is found guilty either under the Departmental proceedings or any Judicial proceedings.

4. She would further submit that reliance placed upon the Tamil Nadu Pension Rules cannot be made applicable to the petitioner, as the petitioner is governed under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Private College (Regulation) Act and Rules framed thereunder. She would further submit that no disciplinary proceedings was initiated against the petitioner during his service and therefore, the payment of terminal benefits cannot be denied to the petitioner. Hence, she seeks indulgence of this Court.

5. Countering his arguments, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the second and third respondents would submit that even though, the proposal had emanated from the second respondent for sanctioning the Pension and Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity and other benefits, the first respondent had returned the proposal indicating that the criminal case is pending against the petitioner. He would submit that the petitioner had been arrayed as an accused for offences under Section 167, 409, 420, 465, 468, 477-A read with 120(b) of IPC and under Sections 13(2) r/w Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1998 and the same is pending trial in Special Case No