Back
L. VICTORIA GOWRI
A. Arumugam, Retired Special Sub Inspector of Police, Thanjavur – Appellant
Versus
State Government of Tamil Nadu, Represented through its Secretary, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by the fourth respondent, the order of regulation/revision of pay passed in R.C.No.S2/4997/2019, dated 13.03.2019 and quash the same and further direct the respondents to refix the petitioner''s pay with increment notionally from 01.10.2018 as Rs.54,100/- and thereby revise his pension.)
1. The present Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the impugned order of regulation/revision of pay passed in R.C.No.S2/4997/2019, dated 13.03.2019 by the fourth respondent and quash the same and further direct the respondents to refix the petitioner''s pay with increment notionally from 01.10.2018 as Rs.54,100/- and thereby revise his pension.
2. Heard Mr.T.S.Mohamed Mohideen, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.N.Muthu Vijayan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 4, 6 & 7 and Ms.S.Mahalakshmi, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the fifth respondent and perused the materials available on record.
3. The petition
The impugned order of regulation/revision of pay, based on a cancelled government letter, was non-est in the eye of law, and the court directed the respondents to refix the petitioner's pay and revis....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of the Government Letter dated 24.08.2007, its subsequent cancellation, and the non-est nature of the impugned orders based on t....
The cancellation of the government letter dated 24.08.2007 rendered the impugned orders non-est in the eye of law, leading to the quashing of the orders and the direction for repayment and pension re....
The cancellation of the government letter and the application of FR 22(1) a(i) and FR 22-B in fixing pay for police personnel were central to the court's decision.
The cancellation of the government letter led to the non-est status of the regulation of pay, influencing the court's decision to quash the impugned orders and direct repayment with interest.
Employer's right to restructure cadre and rationalize pay scales, and the obligation to rectify pay anomalies caused by promotions.
The court established that pending related appeals must be resolved before considering new petitions for relief, ensuring adherence to legal principles.
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
