Back
S. S. SUNDAR, S. SRIMATHY
G. Arokia Rajasekar – Appellant
Versus
Director of School Education, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letter Patent against the order of this Court in W.P.(MD)No.10808 of 2020, dated 24.03.2022.)
S. Srimathy, J.
1. This Writ Appeal is filed challenging the order passed in Writ Petition W.P.(MD)No.10808 of 2020, dated 24.03.2022.
2. The prayer in the writ petition W.P.(MD)No.10808 of 2020 is for Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the order, dated 25.08.2020 of the 3rd respondent and to direct the respondents to confirm the Selection Grade already granted in the proceedings, dated 14.11.2017 and Special Grade in the proceedings, dated 18.06.2020, of the District Educational Officer, Musiri.
3. The facts as stated in the affidavit filed along with the writ petition are that the petitioner was initially appointed by the Correspondent of St. Joseph High School, Verkottu, Ramanathapuram Taluk as Secondary Grade Teacher on 19.08.1999. Then, the petitioner was transferred to LFRC Primary School, Karaikudi Taluk, Sivagangai District and joined duty on 12.06.2008 and continued till 16.07.2009. Then through Employment Exchange, the petitioner was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher in the Panchayat Union Primary School, Thirupampur
The judgment established the principle that recovery of excess payment can be ordered unless extreme hardship is caused to the employee. It also highlighted the importance of public money and the rel....
The court ruled that recovery of higher pay from employees without prior notice and due process violates principles of natural justice, emphasizing the necessity of protecting vested rights.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that entitlement to selection grade and special grade is subject to completion of requisite years of service, and recovery orders issued within one....
Stale and belated claims cannot be entertained, and benefits as directed by a Full Bench order shall be extended only to parties before the Court, with no fresh writ petitions entertained after a spe....
The court ruled against arbitrary recovery of excess salary, emphasizing protections for employees and the necessity for compliance with procedural justice.
Failure of the respondents to communicate the objections as regards excess payment within a reasonable time after the grant of benefits would be iniquitous.
The binding nature of an employee's undertaking regarding the recovery of excess pay and the authority of competent authorities to re-fix pay scale based on applicable Pay Rules and Government Orders....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a petitioner who willingly joins Government service with knowledge of the salary conditions cannot later seek to fix the pay band granted in t....
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
