IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J
Muthulakshmi .K.K – Appellant
Versus
The Director of School Educa – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of petition and voluntary retirement application. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. contentions on recovery impugned without fault of employee. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. recovery beyond five years impermissible under apex court ruling. (Para 5 , 6) |
O R D E R
The present writ petition has been filed challenging the proceedings bearing Na.Ka.No.053130/2023 dated 24.03.2023, whereby the pay of the petitioner, who was working as BT Assistant (Tamil), was refixed consequent to the cancellation of incentive increments that had been granted in her favour.
2. The petitioner is stated to have already submitted an application for voluntary retirement; however, she has not been permitted to proceed with the same due to the pendency of the present writ petition.
3. In the light of the above and the various orders passed by this Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner does not intend to press the challenge regarding the re-fixation of pay. However, it was contended that the recovery sought to be effected through the impugned proceedings is contrary to the orders passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab and others vs. Rafiq Masih (White Was
State of Punjab and others vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and others
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.