S. Pandiarajan vs The Secretary to Government, Commercial Tax Department, The Special Commissioner and Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and The Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Trichy Division

K.B.K. Vasuki, J.—The peculiar circumstances under which the petitioner was compelled to approach this Court after retirement, are as follows: the petitioner was while in service proceeded with departmentally and he was imposed with punishment of stoppage of increment for three years without cumulative effect and the same was modified as one that of stoppage of increment for one year without cumulative effect.

In para 6 of the appeal order it is clearly stated that the above punishment was not intended to affect the pension of the petitioner herein who is the appellant therein and the petitioner was permitted to retire from service on 30.06.1995 A.N. on attaining the age of superannuation. The impugned order came to be passed after three years i.e. on 19.03.1998, in and under which the last para of the appellate authority order dated 05.09.1994 stood substituted to the effect that the punishment imposed on the petitioner is intended to affect the pension of the appellant.

As rightly argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the appellate authority after passing the order becomes functus officio. There is no power for suo-motto review that too after four years from the date of appeal order and three years after retirement of the petitioner herein and without any notice to him. On this score alone, the impugned order is held to be per se arbitrary, contrary to law and in violation of principles of natural justice and the same is hence liable to be quashed.

In the result, the writ petition stands allowed by quashing the order dated 19.03.1998 passed by the second respondent. The respondents are directed to pay all consequential and monetary benefits, if any to the petitioner. No costs.