Back
S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
R. Chandrasekaran – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Social Welfare, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the order of the 3rd respondent herein passed in his Na.Ka.No.1482/A2/2013 dated 24.03.2014 ordering recovery of Rs.1,05,000/- against the petitioner and quash the same.)
1. The order of recovery which is impugned dated 24.03.2014 is under challenge in the present writ petition.
2. The petitioner joined as typist and promoted to the post of Assistant. He was further promoted to the post of Superintendent. With reference to certain Government welfare schemes, certain irregularities were identified. Based on the audit objection, actions were initiated to recover the financial loss caused to the State.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner mainly contended that no show cause notice was issued to the writ petitioner enabling him to defend his case with reference to the allegations or the financial loss, contrarily the impugned order has been passed merely furnishing a copy of the audit report alone which is insufficient in compliance with the principles of natural justice.
4. The learned Additional Government Pleader made a
Violation of principles of natural justice by not affording the petitioner an opportunity to defend against the allegations before passing the recovery order.
Any order affecting the rights of the employee must be passed only after providing an opportunity to the employee.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that any order affecting the rights of an employee, such as the fixation of pay, should be passed only after affording an opportunity for a hear....
The central legal point established is that any order affecting the rights of an employee should be passed only after affording an opportunity to the employee concerned, in accordance with the princi....
Opportunity must be provided before re-fixation of pay, and excess amount paid cannot be recovered from retired employees.
The central legal point established is that any order affecting the rights of an employee, such as the fixation of pay, should be passed only after affording an opportunity for hearing to the employe....
The central legal point established is that any order affecting the rights of an employee, such as pay re-fixation and recovery, should be passed only after providing an opportunity for the employee ....
The authority can rectify pay fixation errors at any time, but recovery of excess payments after a long delay may be unjust and cause hardship.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
