Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.DHANDAPANI
S. Subramanian – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamilnadu Rep. by its Secretary to Government, Health and Family Welfare Department – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of petitioners' appointments and 5% personal pay. (Para 6) |
| 2. petitioners argue against the withdrawal of personal pay. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 3. government's justification for denial of personal pay. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. court's recognition of established legal principles regarding recovery from retired employees. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. court's decision to quash the recovery and refix pension. (Para 14) |
| 6. final order regarding the allowance of certain writ petitions and directions for refund. (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
ORDER :
Since the issue involved in these writ petitions are interrelated, they are heard together and disposed of by way of a common order.
3.W.P.No.47697 of 2025 has been filed seeking issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the Office of Accountant General (A&E), Tamil Nadu, Chennai dated 31.05.2019 having Ref.No.AG (A&E)/PEN PO6/10621447/3/R0621447 and having Ref.No.P08/4/10823980/ADK dated 25.09.2019 issued by the 4th respondent herein and quash the same in so far as the Office of the Accountant General (A&E), Tamil Nadu, Chennai holds that Personal Pay of 5% is allowed only on the pre revised scale of pay and not in the revised sc
Recovery from retired employees is impermissible when excess payments are not due to misrepresentation or fraud.
Recovery of excess payments from retired employees is impermissible without adherence to natural justice, especially when payments were made for an extended period without notice.
The court emphasized that recovery from a retired employee for excess payment without prior notice is impermissible under established legal principles.
Recoveries from retired Group-C employees without prior notice are impermissible under established legal principles, reaffirming the need for due process in excess payment cases.
No disciplinary proceedings are pending against the petitioner. Under such circumstances, withholding of retirement benefits under the guise of the impugned Memo is unjust, arbitrary.
Recovery from retired employees is impermissible unless an undertaking was provided prior to retirement, and pay re-fixation cannot occur after a long time gap.
Recovering excess payments from retirees without misrepresentation violates principles of natural justice.
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
