Recovery of alleged excess salary payments from Group 'C' or 'D' employees, which occurred due to administrative error without any misrepresentation by the employee, is impermissible in law.

(Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.

Challenging the impugned order passed by the first respondent dated 31.10.2025 and the consequential order passed by the second respondent dated 24.03.2026, and seeking a direction to cancel the said orders of refixation and recovery, and consequently to direct the respondents to pay the arrears of salary, pension, gratuity, and all retirement benefits with interest for the belated payment of retirement benefits, the petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition.

2.The petitioner, appointed as a Typist through the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission in 2009, was subsequently promoted to higher posts up to Sherishtadar based on an unblemished service record. Her pay was fixed and revised by the authorities in accordance with applicable Government Orders, and increments were granted without any misrepresentation on her part. After nearly 15 years of service and just before retirement, the respondents issued impugned proceedings alleging erroneous pay fixation under the 6^th Pay Commission and ordered recovery of an alleged excess amount of Rs.3,31,950/-, part of which was already deducted. The petitioner contends that the excess payment, if any, was due to administrative error, and the recovery was initiated without proper opportunity or hearing. She further submits that such recovery, especially after a long lapse of time and at the verge of retirement, is arbitrary, discriminatory, and violative of principles of natural justice. Aggrieved thereby, she has filed the present writ petition.

3.The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that due to incorrect pay fixation, the petitioner had been paid in excess, and therefore, the impugned proceedings dated 02.08.2025 and 11.12.2025 were issued.

4.Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials on record.

5.At the relevant point of time, the petitioner was working in a Group ‘D’ post. It is well settled, as per the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Punjab and Others vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334, that recovery from employees belonging to Class III and Class IV service (or Group ‘C’ and Group ‘D’

service) is impermissible in law. The said ratio is squarely applicable to the petitioner’s case. The respondents have already refixed the pay of the petitioner, and the petitioner has no grievance regarding such re-fixation.

The petitioner only seeks cancellation of the recovery amount.

6.In view of the above, the impugned orders are quashed insofar as they relate to recovery. If any amount has already been recovered pursuant to the impugned proceedings, the same shall be refunded to the petitioner.

7.With the above observations, this Writ Petition is allowed.

There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.