IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27.6.2008 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN W.P.No.16829 of 2006 (T) O.A.No.7801 of 1995 M.Ganapathy .. Petitioner vs. 1. The Director of School Education College Road, Nungambakkam Madras-6 2. The Chief Educational Officer Uthagamandalam (Ooti) Nilgiri District 3. The Headmaster Govt. Higher Secondary School Nedugula Kottagiri (T.K.) Nilgiri District .. Respondents This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records pertaining to the third respondent Headmaster in his recovery intimation order passed in R.C.No.300, dated 28.11.1995, G.H.S.S., Nedugula and set aside the same and further direct the respondents to award the Special Grade Middle School Headmaster pay scale of Rs.2000- 4000 to the applicant with effect from 1.6.1988 onwards (from the date of introduction of V Pay Commission revised pay) on par with his juniors Thiru N.P.Balaraman, K.Subbarayan and K.V.Karuppannan, Middle School Headmasters working in the applications parent unit of Mohanur Panchayat Union and award all the consequential benefits. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For petitioner : Mr.Thennan For Respondents : Mr.T.Sreenivasan Government Advocate O R D E R The petitioner has stated that, as a Secondary Grade qualified Teacher, he was appointed as a Higher Grade place Headmaster from 28.8.1958 to 31.5.1960. Later, he was promoted as a Secondary Grade Assistant and posted as Elementary School Headmaster from 1.6.1960 to 28.7.1961, in Mohanur Panchayat Union. Thereafter, the petitioner has been serving in various posts in different capacities till he was promoted as a Tamil Pandit at the Government Higher Secondary School, Nedugula, Nilgiris District, on 1.12.1993. Since the petitioner had been promoted and as he had served as an Elementary School Headmaster, from 22.6.1973 to 13.7.1976, he was entitled for all the benefits that had accrued to the said post after the introduction of the revised pay based on the recommendations of the Vth Pay Commission. Therefore, the petitioner's pay was fixed in the cadre of Special Grade Elementary School Headmaster, with effect from 1.6.1988. However, the third respondent, by his impugned order R.C.No.300, dated 28.11.1995, had ordered recovery of the excess amount alleged to have been paid to the petitioner. In such circumstances, the petitioner had preferred an original application in O.A.No.7801 of 1995, before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, which has been transferred to this Court and renumbered as W.P.No.16829 of 2006. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner had submitted that the impugned order, dated 28.11.1995, had been passed without any notice being issued to the petitioner and without giving him an opportunity to present his case. Further, the impugned order has been passed, arbitrarily, without stating the reasons for the passing of the said order. 3. It has also been submitted that there was no fraud or misrepresentation on the part of the petitioner, based on which the respondents had re-fixed the pay scale of the petitioner. In fact, the re-fixation of pay scales was done only in accordance with the relevant Rules and the Government orders applicable to them. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4. In the reply affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, the claims made by the petitioner have been denied. It has been stated that the petitioner was absorbed from the Panchayat Union Middle School to the Government High School, only after getting his willingness. Since the petitioner had joined duty in the Government High School during the year, 1976, he is not eligible for any monetary benefits on par with the Elementary School Headmaster scale of pay. Therefore, the action taken by the Headmaster, Government Higher Secondary School, in his impugned order R.C.No.300, dated 28.11.1995, is in order. As per the letter of the Sub-Treasury Officer, Kotagiri, the Headmaster had issued a memo to the petitioner and made the recovery from his pay from November, 1995. The Sub-Treasury Officer, Kotagiri, had instructed that the pay fixed to the petitioner is incorrect as per G.O.Ms.No.216, Finance, (P.C.) Department, dated 22.3.1993. 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 second respondent cannot be sustained in the eye of law. The impugned order had been passed without notice to the petitioner and no opportunity had been given to him to put forth his case. Further, there was no misrepresentation or fraud committed by the petitioner based on which the re-fixation of his pay scale was done. Further, the petitioner had retired from service on his attaining the age of superannuation. 6. It has also been seen that the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, had granted an order of interim stay of the impugned proceedings of recovery, dated 28.11.1995 and it has been in force till date. 7. With regard to the prayer of the petitioner requesting this Court to issue a direction to the respondents to award the Special Grade Middle School Headmaster pay scale of Rs.2000-4000 to the petitioner, with effect from 1.6.1988, with all attendant benefits, it is stated by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that it would suffice if the petitioner is permitted to make a representation to the respondents with regard to the said relief sought for in the writ petition. Hence, the petitioner is permitted to make a representation to the respondents, with regard to the said request of the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from today, and on such representation being submitted, the respondents are directed to pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks thereafter. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 8. Accordingly, the impugned proceedings of the second respondent, dated 28.11.1995, is set aside and the writ petition stands partly allowed. No costs. Lan Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar To: 1. The Director of School Education College Road, Nungambakkam Madras-6 2. The Chief Educational Officer Uthagamandalam (Ooti) Nilgiri District 3. The Headmaster Govt. Higher Secondary School Nedugula Kottagiri (T.K.) Nilgiri District • 1 cc to the Government Pleader, SR No.33378 • 1 cc to Mr. K. Thennan, Advocate SR No. 33176 W.P.No.16829 of 2006 (T) O.A.No.7801 of 1995 SJ(CO) SR/8.7.2008 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/