Back
S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, C. KUMARAPPAN
S. Chitra – Appellant
Versus
Secretary to Government – Respondent
ORDER :
(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the 3rd respondent in connection with the impugned order passed by him in D.No.1983 dated 21.08.2023 and quash the same.
The notice issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cuddalore stating that an Audit Objection has been raised by the Internal Audit Wing of the High Court regarding erroneous fixation of pay to the petitioner is under challenge in the present writ petition.
2. The petitioner was asked to submit her objections within a period of one week. After submitting objections, the petitioner has chosen to file the writ petition.
3. No writ against the notice is entertainable in normal circumstances. Once a notice has been issued by the competent Authority, the employee is bound to respond and only after passing final orders, the writ petition is to be entertained. An Internal Audit Wing was constituted by the High Court to verify the correctness of the fixations made to the Court Staff across the State of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry. A special task was undertaken and accordingly, ma
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.
Opportunity must be provided before re-fixation of pay, and excess amount paid cannot be recovered from retired employees.
The court established that recovery of excess salary from a retired employee is unjustified if it causes undue hardship, despite the authority's power to correct pay errors.
Recovery of excess salary after a prolonged period is impermissible, especially when prior regularization orders are final.
The court established that while authorities can correct pay fixation errors, the recovery of excess payments must consider the potential hardship to the employee, especially after a long period.
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....
Any order affecting the rights of the employee must be passed only after providing an opportunity to the employee.
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....
Authorities have the power to correct pay fixation errors, but recovery of excess payments is not permissible if the employee did not misrepresent their pay and if such recovery would cause undue har....
Recovery cannot be initiated beyond the period of five years from the allegedly offending event.
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
