IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27.6.2008 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN W.P.No.16883 of 2006 (T) O.A.No.2415 of 1996 1. R.Balakrishnan 2. K.Kulandaivelu 3. S.Thangaraj 4. N.Annakamu .. Petitioners vs. 1. The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by the Secretary to Govt., Finance (Pay Commission) Department Fort St. George Madras-9 2. The Joint Director (Incharge) of Health Service Periyakulam Madurai 3. The Medical officer Office of the Medical Officer Govt. Leprosy Centre Periyakulam .. Respondents This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certioari to call for the records on the file of the Medical Officer, Government Leprosy Control Centre, Periyakulam in connection with the orders passed by in his proceedings Na.Ka.No.63/AkA/95, dated 15.6.1995, and quash the same. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For petitioner : Mr.R.Singaravelan For Respondents : Mr.T.Sreenivasan Government Advocate O R D E R It is stated that the petitioners have been serving in the post of Special Grade Pharmacist, without any blemish. The first petitioner was selected for being appointed as a Pharmacist and he had joined service on 22.2.1967. The second petitioner was selected for appointment to the said post and he had joined service on 17.12.1966. Similarly, the third petitioner was selected for the said post and he had joined service on 8.12.1967 and the fourth petitioner had joined service as a Pharmacist on 24.12.1967. The petitioners had claimed Selection Grade and Special Grade scales of pay after completion of 10 years and 20 years, respectively, based on the recommendation of the Vth Pay Commission, dated 27.6.1989, and G.O.Ms.No.304, dated 28.3.1990. By an order passed on 27.8.1990, the revised scale of pay was fixed for the petitioners. However, all of a sudden, the impugned order, dated 15.6.1995, had been passed ordering the recovery of the amounts paid to the petitioners, in accordance with the revised scale of pay. The Medical Officer, Government Leprosy Control Centre, Periyakulam, the third respondent, in his proceedings Na.Ka.No.63/Aka/95, dated 15.6.1995, ordered the recovery of the amounts, as mentioned therein, from the petitioners. 2. The petitioners have further stated that the impugned proceedings, dated 15.6.1995, had been passed without any notice being issued to the petitioners and without giving them an opportunity to present their cases. Further, the impugned orders have been passed arbitrarily, without stating the reasons, for the passing of the said order. 3. It has also been submitted that the re-fixation of the pay scales of the petitioners has been done only by the respondents. There was no fraud or misrepresentation on the part of the petitioners based on which the respondents had re-fixed the pay scales of the petitioners. In fact, the re-fixation of pay scales was done only in accordance with the relevant Rules and the Government orders applicable to them. 4. A reply affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents denying the claims made by the petitioners. It has been stated that the re-fixation of the pay scales of the petitioners was done wrongly, and therefore, the audit objections had been raised by the Accountant General and Local Audit. Therefore, the recovery of the excess amounts paid had to be ordered. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing for the parties concerned and on a perusal of the records available, this Court is of the considered view that the impugned order of recovery passed by the third respondent cannot be sustained in the eye of law. The impugned order had been passed without notice to the petitioners and no opportunity had been given to them to put forth their cases. Further, there was no misrepresentation or fraud committed by the petitioners based on which the re-fixation of their pay scales was done. Further, all the petitioners had retired from service on their attaining the age of superannuation. 6. It is also seen that the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal had granted an order of interim stay of the impugned proceedings, dated 15.6.1995, and it has been in force till date. In such circumstances, the impugned proceedings of the Medical Officer, Government Leprosy Control Centre, Periyakulam, the third respondent herein, in his proceedings Na.Ka.No.63/Aka/95, dated 15.6.1995, is set aside and the writ petition stands allowed. No costs. sd/- Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar To: 1. The Secretary to Govt., Finance (Pay Commission) Department The State of Tamil Nadu Fort St. George Madras-9 2. The Joint Director (Incharge) of Health Service Periyakulam Madurai 3. The Medical officer Office of the Medical Officer Govt. Leprosy Centre Periyakulam +1 cc To Mr.R.Singaravelan, Advocate, SR.32820 1 cc To The Government Pleader, SR.33252 W.P.No.16883 of 2006 (T) O.A.No.2415 of 1996 ssn [co] gkg/8.7 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/