IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 8.7.2008 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN W.P.Nos.20646 and 20661 of 2006 O.A.Nos.17 and 18 of 1996 (T) 1. A.Davidson (deceased) 2. Florence Davidson (2nd petitioner is impleaded as the L.Rs.of the deceased 1st petitioner as per the order of this Court dated 18.6.2008, in M.P.Nos.1 + 1 of 2006 in W.P.Nos.20661 and 20646 of 2006).. Petitioners in both the writ petitions vs. 1. The Chief Conservator of Forests Social Forestry Circle E.V.R. Building Nandanam, Madras 2. The Conservator of Forests Social Forestry Circle Trichy-20 3. The Divisional Forest Officer Social Forestry Division 13, Solai Road, Woraiyur Trichy-3 .. Respondents in both the writ petitions
W.P.No.20646 of 2006:
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the second respondent in connection with the order passed by him in his proceedings Se.Mu.Ka.No.14092/94, Thi dated 16.8.1995, and quash the same and retain the amount if withheld.
W.P.No.20661 of 2006:
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the second respondent in connection with the order passed by him in his proceedings Ref.C.No.12597/92 G1, dated 6.4.1995, and quash the same and retain the amount if withheld.
For petitioner : Mr.R.Singaravelan
For Respondents : Mr.A.N.Purusothaman
Government Advocate (F)
C O M M O N O R D E R
One A.Davidson, (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased first petitioner”) had preferred original applications in O.A.Nos.17 and 18 of 1996, before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, which have been transferred to this Court and renumbered as W.P.Nos.20646 and 20661 of 2006.
2. Since the original petitioner in the present writ petition had died, on 6.6.2005, the present petitioner, who is the legal representative of the deceased petitioner, has been brought on record by an order of this Court, dated 18.6.2008, made in M.P.Nos.1 of 2006 in W.P.Nos.20661 and 20646 of 2006.
3. It is stated that the deceased first petitioner was selected for appointment to the post of Forester, by direct recruitment, on merits, and he had joined service, on 8.12.1963. The deceased first petitioner was promoted to the post of Ranger in the month of March, 1982, and from the date of the said promotion, he has been carrying on his duties without any blemish. While so, charge memos, dated 21.11.1994 and 3.1.1995 in W.P.No.20661 of 2006 and W.P.No.20646 of 2006 respectively, had been issued against the deceased first petitioner, levelling certain minor charges against him for not forwarding some details of certain works. The deceased first petitioner could not submit his explanation in time. Without giving an opportunity to the deceased first petitioner, the second respondent had passed an order, dated 6.4.1995, for recovering a sum of Rs.98,185/-, challenged in W.P.No.20661 of 2006, and an order, dated 16.8.1995, for recovering a sum of Rs.1,00,845/- challenged in W.P.No.20646 of 2006.
4. The petitioner had further stated that the charge memos, dated 21.11.1994 and 3.1.1995 had been issued for the incidents, which are alleged to have been taken place in the year 1992-1993. The impugned orders have been passed by the second respondent without permitting the deceased first petitioner to peruse the official records in order to enable him to submit his explanations and without looking into the records submitted by the deceased first petitioner.
5. In the reply affidavits filed on behalf of the respondents, the claims made by the deceased first petitioner had been denied. It has been stated that the deceased first petitioner was a Ranger in charge of Periakulam motivation Range, from 19.5.1992 to 23.9.1995, under the control of the Assistant Conservator of Forests, Motivation Unit, Trichy. In order to achieve the physical target, the deceased first petitioner had submitted estimates for carrying out the works. The deceased first petitioner had submitted completion reports, on 12.7.1993, and 23.11.1994. As per the instructions for submission of completion reports, the item wise explanation for the difference between the quantity, rate and cost of the works executed and those entered in the sanctioned estimate are to be furnished by the Ranger. After receiving the completion reports submitted by the deceased first petitioner, certain details were called for from him. However, even after the repeated reminders, the required details were not furnished. Therefore, memos under Rule 17(a) of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules were issued to him by the conservator of Forests, Social Forestry Circle, Trichy, in reference No.12597/92 G1, dated 21.11.1994 and C.No.14092/94P, dated 6.5.1995. Inspite of opportunities being given to the deceased first petitioner to submit his explanation, he did not submit his explanation in time with all the necessary details. In such circumstances, the second respondent had passed the impugned proceedings No.12597/92 G1, dated 6.4.1995 and the proceedings No.14092/94 P, dated 16.8.1995.
6. At the time of the hearing of the writ petitions, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents had placed before this Court a communication, dated 5.7.2008, from the Divisional Forest Officer, Social Forestry Division, which is as follows:
“In continuation of the reference 5th cited, I am furnishing the following remarks in respect of the O.A.s.17 & 18/96 (Assigned writ petition Nos.20646/2006 and 20661/2006 respectively) filed by Thiru A.Davidson, the then Forest Ranger before the Hon’ble Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Chennai.
1. Thiru A.Davidson, the then Forest Ranger before his retirement on superannuation which was due on 31.7.1999 lastly worked in Industrial Wood Division, Kodaikanal. In Ref.No.G5/8577/98, dated 24.6.1999, the Conservator of Forests, Dindigul Circle, Dindigul has submitted a report to the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Chennai stating that an amount of Rs.3,11,165/- (Inclusive of amount involved in O.A.17/1996 and 18/1996) has to be recovered from Thiru A.Davidson, Forest Ranger. Subsequently, the Conservator of Forests Dindigul has submitted a report to the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests, Chennai, vide Ref.No.8577/98 G3 dated 8.7.1999, stating that the actual amount due from Thiru A.Davidsen is only Rs.296989/- and based on the consent letter given by him this amount may be recovered from the retiring benefits of the Ranger and he may be permitted to retire on superannuation. Accordingly the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests vide Ref No A1/42002/99, dated 30.7.1999 has allowed Thiru A.Davidson, Forest Ranger to retire on superannuation in lieu of the condition that the amount of Rs.296989/- due to Government has to be recovered from the retiring benefits (ie DCRG, Commuted Value of Pension and leave salary) of the said Ranger based on the undertaking given by him.
3. In Deputy Conservator of Forests, Industrial wood Division Kodaikanal Ref.No.E/3089/dated 22.4.1999, proposals have been sent to the Accountant General, Chennai for sanction of Pension and DCRG to Thiru A.Davidson, Forest Ranger. In which it has been mentioned that there is a liability of Rs.311094/- due from Thiru A.Davidson, Forest Ranger to the Government and the Ranger has also given consent letter to recover the dues from his pensionary benefits. Accordingly, the Accountant General has authorised for payment of pensionary benefits as follows:
I Death cum Retirement Gratuity
Principal Accountant General, Chennai Pen No.P21/1/D13-235/AR/99-2000/dated 22.9.1999
PPO.No.C45823/For
Original/Revised amount of Gratuity -Rs.180774
(Rupees one Lakh Eighty Thousand Seven hundred
and Seventy Four only)
RECOVERIES
Rs.311094/- IS RECOVERABLE AS DUES HENCE ENTIRE DCRG MAY BE ADJUSTED TOWARDS DUES AND CREDITED TO HEAD OF A/C CONCERNED BALANCE RS.130320/= RECOVERABLE FROM CVP WITH REF TO CONSENT LETTER GIVEN BY THE GOVERNMENT SERVANT.
II. COMMUTED VALUE OF PENSION Principal Accountant General, Chennai Pen No.P21/1/D13-235/AR/99-2000/Dt.22.09.1999 PPO.No.C45823/FOR Commuted Value of Pension Rs.200364/- (Rupees Two Lakes Three Hundred and Sixty Four only)
The Retired official has given consent letter for recovering the balance of Government dues from CVP. As such a sum of Rs.130320/- (Rs. One Lakh Thirty Thousand Three Hundred and Twenty only) may be recovered and credited to Head of A/C concerned.
As stated above an amount of Rs.311094/- has been recovered from the retirement benefits of Thiru. A.Davidson. Further it is confirmed that Thiru A.Davidson, the then Forest Ranger died on 6.6.2005. A copy of the death certificate issued by the Registrar, Birth & Death, Thiruvidhangudi dated 16.6.2005 is enclosed herewith for favour of information.
The following records are enclosed herewith for information and further action.
1. Principal Accountant General, Chennai Pen No.P21/1/D13-235/AR/99-2000/Dt. 22.9.1999.
2. Principal Accountant General, Chennai Pen No.P21/1/D13-235/AR/99-2000/Dt.22.9.1999.
3. Principal Chief Conservator of Forests vide Ref No.A1/42002/99, Dt 30.7.1999.
4. Registrar, Birth & Death, Thiruvidhangudi Dated 16.6.2005.
5. Statement of undertaking given by Thiru. A.Davidson, Forest Ranger.
I request that the above mentioned facts may please be placed before the Hon’ble Court and the said writ petition may please be got dismissed.”
7. However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that the actual amounts due to the petitioner, as retiral benefits, has not been paid. The family pension had not been paid to the deceased first petitioner, in view of the impugned orders passed by the second respondent. After the death of the deceased first petitioner, on 6.6.2005, the legal heir had been brought on record by an order of this Court, dated 18.6.2008. Even thereafter the respondents have not settled the amounts due to the deceased first petitioner, including the family pension.
8. It was also submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that this Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to pay the entire amounts due to the petitioner, including the family pension, after deducting the amounts liable to be recovered from the deceased first petitioner, in accordance with the impugned orders passed by the second respondent.
9. The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents had no objection for this Court passing such orders.
10. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned, the respondents are directed to disburse the retiral benefits and the family pension due to the the deceased first petitioner, after deducting the amounts liable to be recovered from him, in accordance with the impugned orders passed by the second respondent, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
11. With regard to the amounts withheld by the respondents, it is open to the petitioner to settle the matter by way of filing an appeal before the first respondent, in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such appeal being made, the first respondent is to pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks thereafter.
Accordingly, the writ petitions stand disposed of. Consequently, connected M.P.Nos.1 of 2008 are closed. No costs.
lan
To:
1. The Chief Conservator of Forests
Social Forestry Circle
E.V.R. Building
Nandanam, Madras
2. The Conservator of Forests
Social Forestry Circle
Trichy-20
3. The Divisional Forest Officer
Social Forestry Division
13, Solai Road, Woraiyur
Trichy 3