Suspension due to criminal charges should not deprive the employee of service benefits upon acquittal, as per Regulation 57(A).

ORDER :

1. The petitioner herein while working as the Assistant Executive Engineer in the respondent Board was placed under suspension vide order dated 20.10.2010 on the ground that he was involved in an offence punishable under Sections 7, 13(2) r/w 13(1) of Prevention of Corruption Act and under Section 19(1)(c) of Prevention of Corruption Act 1988.

2. The Petitioner approached this Court by filing WP(MD) No. 4379 of 2012. This Court, by an order dated 04.04.2012, directed the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner seeking revocation of suspension. However, the respondent Board thought it fit to continue the petitioner under suspension and issued a memo dated 31.05.2012. It was thereafter the petitioner attained the age of superannuation on 31.5.2015. But he was not permitted to retire from service as the criminal proceedings were pending and he was also placed under the suspension contemplating to initiate departmental proceedings. The said criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner in Spl. S.C. No. 56 of 2014 on the file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate cum Special Judge, Srivillputhur ended in acquittal on 30/6/2022. Consequently, the said judgment become final and the respondent Board has decided not to file any appeal thereon.

3. It was thereafter the suspension that was imposed by order dated 20.10.2010 was revoked through the proceedings dated 14.06.2023 and the petitioner was allowed to retire from service on the date on which he attained the age of superannuation, that is 31.05.2015. The respondent Board issued the impugned proceedings dated 04.12.2024 holding that the petitioner is entitled for pay and allowances on regularising his service during which period he was out of service, that is from the date of suspension till the date of superannuation under Regulation 57, 57-A, 57- B, 57(1) of TNEB service regulations. Through in the said proceedings, it was further directed that the said period that is from 20.10.2010 till 31.05.2015 is directed to be regularized and treated as a leave on any kind due admissible to the petitioner and exceeding period of suspension shall be converted into extraordinary leave without pay in terms of Regulation 57 of TNEB service Regulations. Consequently, the third respondent issued a memo No.012897/874/SE/VDR/Adm.1/A. 1/F.C/2025-1 dated 30.01.2025 treating the period of suspension as Earned leave., Unearned Leave EOL on private affairs and EOL without pay and allowances for different periods. Aggrieved by the said proceedings dated 04.12.2024 and the consequential proceeding dated 30.01.2025, the petitioner approached this Court by filling the present writ petition.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that the petitioner herein was placed under suspension because of his involvement in a criminal case under Prevention of Corruption Act. The said suspension continued till the date on which he attained the age of superannuation on 31.01.2015. Originally, he was not permitted to retire from service till the date on which the petitioner was acquitted in the above referred criminal case that is on 30.06.2022. It is only after the petitioner was acquitted in the criminal case, the suspension was revoked and he was allowed to retire from service with effect from 31.05.2025.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed strong reliance on the Ruling 9 of Regulation 57(A) of the TNEB Regulations and contended that by virtue of his acquittal in the criminal case, he is entitled for full pay and allowances, which he would have been entitled had he not been placed under suspen