Back
S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, K. RAJASEKAR
G. Malathi – Appellant
Versus
Family Court Judge, Family Court, Villupuram – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.M. Subramaniam, J.
(Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by 3rd respondent in No.AG (A & E)/PEN P02/2/10224367, dated 25.04.2019 and the consequential order of recovery passed by the 1st respondent in office order No.76/2019, dated 08.07.2019 and quash both the orders and direct the respondents to refund the recovered amount of Rs.4,65,159/- with interests and to provide pension by taking the petitioner's Selection Grade as Rs.4200/-.)
1. The revision of scale of pay of the petitioner restricting his pay as applicable to the next level promotional post as done by the Accountant General of Tamil Nadu is sought to be quashed in the present writ proceedings.
2. The petitioner joined as Senior Bailiff/Bailiff on 20.12.1995 carrying the scale of pay to Rs.975-1660 as per the 5th Pay Commission scale of pay. Pursuant to the 1998 Pay Rules, the scale of Pay of the petitioner was re-fixed as Rs.3200-85-4800. On completion of 10 years of service, the petitioner was awarded Selection Grade with effect from 24.12.2005 carrying pay a
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....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the eligibility for the revised scale of pay as per the Government letter dated 08.11.2010 based on the date of award of Selection Grade.
Competent authorities can correct pay fixation errors at any time, but recovery of excess pay must be balanced against the potential hardship to the employee.
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 the error in fixation of pay is to be corrected right from the III Pay Commission fixation and the petitioners are to be promoted to the highe....
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....
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
