S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
K. P. Rajendran – Appellant
Versus
Principal Accountant General, (Accounts & Entitlements) Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned order of the first respondent in PO8/10809356/1-Ro809356 dated 10.07.2014 and the order of the second respondent in proceedings No.697/A/Ma.Ps.Ma.(Su)Se/14 dated 20.08.2014 and quash the same and direct the respondents to restore the pay fixation which existed prior to the issue of the impugned orders and to refund the amount recovered from the petitioner's gratuity, that is, Rs.76715/- with interest as per Rules.)
1. The order of fixation of pay and revision of pension and consequential recovery orders are under challenge in the present writ petition.
2. The petitioner was appointed as Helper in the Tamil Nadu State Health Transport Department on 06.03.1980. He was promoted as Fitter-II on 18.06.1982 and finally promoted as Foreman and retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.05.2014.
3. The grievance of the petitioner is that he was awarded with the Selection Grade-I on completion of 10 years of service. Accordingly, his pay was revised during the relevant point of time for rec
Erroneous fixation of pay or pension can be corrected, but recovery after retirement causing hardship is not sustainable without evidence of misrepresentation or written undertakings.
Recovery of excess payment from a retired employee should not be allowed, especially in the absence of misrepresentation, as it would result in hardship. Any order affecting the right of an employee ....
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....
Recovery of excess payment from a retired employee is impermissible, except in cases of undertaking or misrepresentation.
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....
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 ....
Recovery of alleged excess salary payments from Group 'C' or 'D' employees, which occurred due to administrative error without any misrepresentation by the employee, is impermissible in law.
Violation of natural justice in issuing orders affecting the rights of a pensioner and the empowerment of respondents to correct the scale of pay and revision of pension in accordance with the applic....
Opportunity must be provided before re-fixation of pay, and excess amount paid cannot be recovered from retired employees.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.