The court emphasized the principles of natural justice, highlighting the importance of providing notice and opportunity to be heard before passing adverse orders.

It is stated by the petitioner that he was appointed as a Lab Attender in the year, 1959. He was promoted as a clerk in the year 1963, with effect from 5. 1961. While so, he was placed under suspension, with effect from 2. 1969 to 4. 1970. Subsequently, the punishment for a period of five years was imposed on the petitioner, with effect from 4. 1970. On completion of the period of punishment, the petitioner was allowed to join as a Junior Assistant from 6. 1975, taking into account the service rendered by him as a clerk, with effect from 9. 1961 to 2. 1969 and 6. 1975 to 10. 1978. The petitioner was given the Special Temporary Assistant post on the completion of 10 years of service. However, after the lapse of 25 years, the respondent had cancelled the Special Temporary Assistant post given to the petitioner, with effect from 1.0.1978, on the ground for counting the period of 10 years of service rendered in the cadre of Junior Assistant would be only with effect from 6. 1975 and the service rendered by the petitioner between 5. 1961 and 12. 1969 would not be taken into account. Consequently, the respondent had passed the impugned order, dated 3. 1994, to recover an amount of Rs.24,000/-, which had been paid to him as salary and other allowances. By a further order, dated 16. 1994, the respondent had confirmed his earlier order, dated 3. 1994. In such circumstances, the petitioner has filed an original application before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, in O.A.No.911 of 1996, which has been transferred to this Court and renumbered as W.P.No.28440 of 2006.

2. A reply affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents denying the claims made by the petitioner. It has been stated that the petitioner had joined as a Lab Attender in the cadre of record clerk from 20.2.1959. The petitioner belongs to B wing. He was appointed as a clerk by promotion, with effect from 5. 1961. While he was working as such he was placed under suspension, from 2. 1969 to 4. 1970. By way of punishment he was reverted to the post of record clerk for five years. Subsequently, he was promoted as a Special Temporary Assistant from 10. 1978, as per G.O.Ms.No.1050, Finance (Pay Commission), dated 10. 1978. However, the promotion granted to the petitioner as Special Temporary Assistant had been cancelled by the respondent as the said promotion was found to be against the service rules applicable to the petitioner. Hence, the impugned order had been passed recovering the excess payment made to the petitioner.

3. In view of the averments made on behalf of the petitioner as well as the respondents and on a perusal of the records available, it is seen that the promotion to the post of Special Temporary Assistant had been granted to the petitioner with effect from 10. 1978 and it was not granted based on any fraud or misrepresentation on the part of the petitioner. Further, the impugned order had been passed after a lapse of nearly 15 years from the date of the petitioners promotion. No notice had been given to the petitioner and no opportunity was given to him to put forth his case before the impugned order was passed by the respondent. It is also seen that the petitioner had already retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation.

4. In such circumstances, the orders passed by the respondent on 3. 1994, and 16. 1994, are set aside. It is open to the petitioner to submit a representation to the authorities concerned for the refund of the amount recovered from him pursuant to the impugned orders passed by the respondent.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands allowed. No costs.