IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 09.01.2026 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SHAMIM AHMED W.A.No.59 of 2026

1. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. By the Secretary Tamil Development and Religious Endowment Department Fort St. George Chennai – 600 009.

2. The Commissioner Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department Chennai – 600 034. .. Appellants Vs.

P.Sundarakumar Pandian .. Respondent Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order dated 21.02.2025 made in W.P.No.6853 of 2024.

For the Appellants : Mr.S.Ravichandran Additional Government Pleader (HR & CE Department)

For the Respondent : Mr.R.Sanjay JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was made by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.)

This intra Court appeal has been directed against the order passed by the Writ Court dated 21.02.2025 made in W.P.No.6853 of

2024.

2.1 That the respondent was working as Executive Officer (Group I) (Superintendent) under the second appellant and retired from service on 30.11.1999. During his service, there was a Disciplinary Proceedings initiated against him under Rule 17(b) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules and a punishment of stoppage of increment for a period of six months with cumulative effect also was imposed vide proceedings dated

06.09.1999.

2.2. Challenging the said order, the respondent/writ petitioner filed an Original Application in O.A.No.6353 of 1999 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, which stood transferred and renumbered as W.P.No.40637 of 2006, by the order dated 06.04.2010, the Writ Court allowed the said writ petition and set aside the punishment.

2.3. Thereafter, the respondent/writ petitioner filed a representation seeking redetermination of his pensionary benefits and since the same has not been considered, once again, he has approached the Writ Court by filing yet another writ petition in W.P.No.23278 of 2012, which was allowed by the Writ Court vide the order dated 04.09.2023, giving a clear direction to the appellant Department to notionally promote the respondent/writ petitioner to the post of Assistant Commissioner with all monetary benefits within a period of twelve weeks.

2.4. Despite these orders, since a rejection order has been passed on 29.11.2023, that was under challenge in the present writ petition, that is the third round of litigation in W.P.No.6853 of 2024, which was allowed by the learned Writ Court through the impugned order.

3. Heard Mr.S.Ravichandran, learned Additional Government Pleader (HR & CE Department) for the appellants and Mr.R.Sanjay, learned counsel for the respondent/writ petitioner/caveator.

4. In the first round of litigation, the learned Writ Court, by the order dated 06.04.2010, has set aside the punishment and passed the following orders:-

“6. Under these circumstances as srightly pointed out by the petitioner, the order passed by the Authority has become un-workable order, the order should have clarified, further quantified the amount and direction should have been given for the actual recovery. In this case, since this has not been done the order as stated by the petitioner has beocme un-workable order. Hence, the order is set aside and the petitioner has retired on 30.11.1999. Even the charge also is only for spending the amount of Rs.9,800/- without sanction which ultimately also has been ratified.

7. Under those circumstances, the punishment meted out in the un-workable order has to be set aside and hence the impugned order is set aside and the writ petition is allowed. No costs. The pension would be revised accordingly.”

5. Even pursuant to this order itself, the relief could have been given to the respondent/writ petitioner, but, as the same has not been considered and granted, it triggered the respondent/writ petitioner to file the second round of litigation in W.P.No.23278 of 2012, which was disposed by the Writ Court by the order dated

04.09.2023, where, the following orders have bee