IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 03.08.2009 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR W.P. NOs. 16804 and 22017 of 2004 . . . . . . . WP No.16804/2004:- C. Sadasivam ... Petitioner vs 1.The District Collector, Kanyakumari District. 2.The Panchayat Union Commissioner, Killiyur, Kanyakumari District. .. Respondents WP No. 22017 of 2004:- 1.Mohandoss 2.Madhavanpillai 3.Poomanyraj 4.K.Kumarasamy 5.T. Paul Pandian 6.S. Swarnappan 7.A.Charles Thangaraj 8.V. Jebagnanadass 9.R. Ponnappan 10.S. Paulraj 11.A. Subramania Pillai 12.Tmt. K. Sujatha 13.V. Eswaran Pillai 14. A. Michael Flowrance 15. I. Kumresan 16. P. Thaniyal 17. V. Nagamani 18. M. Nesaian 19.C. Suyambulingam 20.R. Selvamany 21. C. Sadasivam (petitioners 3,15,17 & 20 withdrawn the WP as per order dt. 29.8.2007 in WPM.P.No.1912/2007 in WP.22017/04) .. Petitioners https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Vs. 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, rep. By the Secretary to Govt., Rural Development (E5) Dept., Secretariat, Chennai.9. 2.The Director of Rural Development, Panagal Building, Chennai.15. 3. The District Collector, Kanyakumari District, Nagercoil. ...Respondents Prayer: Petition in WP No. 16804 of 2004 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records on the file of the 2nd respondent in connection with the orders passed by him in Proc.A1.515/2003, dated 20.2.2003 and quash the same . Petition in WP No. 22017 of 2004 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the first respondent in connection with the order passed by him in G.O.(IID) No.97, Rural Development (E5) Dept., dated 1.10.2003 and quash the same and direct the respondents to pay continuously the pay of Bill Collectors of Town Panchayats as per G.O.Ms.No.117, Rural Development (E5) Dept., dated 10.5.2005. For Petitioner : Mr. R. Singaravelan For Respondent : Mr. T. Seenivasan Addl. Govt. Pleader ......... COMMON ORDER W.P.No. 16804 of 2004 is filed by the petitioner challenging the order of recovery of excess pay dated 20.2.2003. 2. The petitioner in WP No. 16804 of 2004 joined the services of the second respondent – panchayat union as group clerk- cum-bill collector on 31.12.1984. He filed an application before the State Administrative Tribunal for a direction to grant him the benefit of G.O.Ms.NO. 117, Rural Development Department (E5), dated 10.5.2000 and prayed for grant of regular time scale of pay in terms of paragraph 2(c) of the Government Order. However, based on https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ audit objection, the recovery order was passed by refixing the pay without taking into consideration the recommendation of the pay commission and the G.O.No. 117, dated 10.5.2000. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that till the pay is properly fixed by the Government pursuant to the order of Tribunal and G.O.Ms.No.(2D) No. 97, dated 1.10.2003, there can be no order for recovery. He pointed out that in paragraph 5 of G.O.(2D) No.97, Rural Development (E5) Department, dated 1.10.2003, it is stated that the Tribunal has specifically ordered that no recovery order should be passed and the Government has accepted the same and stated in Paragraphs 6 and 7 of G.O.(2D) No.97, Rural Development (E5) Department, dated 1.10.2003 as follows:- " In view of the above judgment and after detailed examination, the Government decided, (i)to release the excess amount recovered from the village Panchayat Group Clerks-cum-Bill Collectors in Kanyakumari District: and (iv) to call for separate proposals from the Director of Rural Development/ Collector of Kanniyakumari District for fixation of the pay of Village Panchayat Group Clerks-cum-Bill Collectors in Kanniyakumari District based on the pay Commission recommendation, with date of effect to be given. 7. Accordingly, the Government now order for the release of the amount recovered from the Death-cum- Retirement Gratuity from the Village Panchayat Group Clerk-cum-Bill collectors of the Kanniyakumari District. 8. The Collector of Kanniyakumari District/ Director of Rural Development are requested to send concrete proposals to Government for examination and fixation of the pay of the Group Clerks-cum-Panchayat Bill Collectors of Kanniyakumar District based on the Pay Commission recommendation with date of effect to be given. " It is further stated that in view of the above said Government Order, pending finalisation of the pay and a proposal to fix the pay, the order of recovery has to be set aside and any amount recovered has to be released. 4. W.P.No. 22107 of 2004 has been filed by the Bill Collectors, who were serving with the third respondent. They have been appointed from the year 1964 onwards. They have been serving in the post of Group clerk-cum-Bill Collectors in the town panchayat and receiving the salary applicable to Bill Collectors serving in the town panchayat. Thereafter, due to formation of village panchayat and town panchayat, surplus group clerks-cum-bill collectors were transferred to newly formed village panchayat. Pursuant to 4th Pay Commission, the pay of the bill collectors have https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ been re-fixed. According to the petitioners, on transfer and appointment to village panchayat, they will be entitled to the same scale of pay as they were receiving while they served in the town panchayat. There can be no anomaly or discrimination to pay for the same work. The grievance of the petitioners is that the District Collector has refixed the pay without taking into consideration the services of the petitioners at the town panchayat level, at the time of appointment. It is only on re- organisation and the petitioners have been transferred to Village panchayat. While re-fixing the pay, the authorities have not taken into consideration G.O.Ms.No.117, dated 10.5.2000, in particular paragraph 2(c) which reads as follows:- @ ,) Vw;wKiw Cjpak; Vw;fdnt bgw;WtUk; fd;dpahFkhp khtl;lj;jpYs;s fpuhk Cuhl;rpf;FG vGj;jh; kw;Wk; thptNyh;fSk; ntW khtl;l';fspYs;s rpy fpuhk Cuhl;rpfspy; Kd;gpUe;J Cuhl;rpfs; rl;lk; 1958 gphpt[ 57(3) d;go mg;nghija khtl;l Ml;rpah;fs; Mizapl;lgo Vw;wKiw Cjpa tpfpjk; Vw;fdnt bgw;WtUk; Kgneu vGj;jh;fSk; (rk;ge;jg;gl;l Cjpa tpfpjk; Vw;fdnt bgw;WtUk; Kgneu vGj;jh;fSk; (rk;ge;jg;gl;l fpuhk Cuhl;rp epiy 1?Mf ,Ue;jhYk; my;yJ epiy?2 Mf ,Ue;jhYk;) mnj Cjpa Kiwapy; bjhlh;e;J bgw mDkjpf;fg;gLfpwJ/ mg;gzpapl';fs; fhypahFk;nghJ epiy?1 fpuhk Cuhl;rpahf ,Ue;jhy; gof;fg;gl;lit ehd;F kw;Wk; vl;oy; Fwpg;gpl;Ls;s murhizfs; go bjhFg;g[jpa mog;gilapy; Kgneu fpuhk Cuhl;rp vGj;jiu epakdk; bra;antz;Lk;/ epiy?2 fpuhk Cuhl;rpahf ,Ue;jhy; nkny gj;jp 2(m) kw;Wk; 2(M) fPH; Mizapl;Ls;sgo bjhFg;g[jpa mog;gilapy; gFjpneu vGj;jiu epakdk; bra;antz;Lk;/@ 5. It is further stated that based on the order of the Tribunal, the Government has directed the Collector, Kanniyakumari district to send a proposal as follows:- “The Collector of Kanniyakumari District/ Director of Rural Development are requested to send concrete proposals to Government for examination and fixation of the pay of the Group Clerks-cum-Panchayat Bill Collectors of Kanniyakumar District based on the Pay Commission recommendation with date of effect to be given. " 6. The learned counsel for the petitioners states that, while the Collector proposes to refix the pay based on the Government Order G.O.Ms.No.117, dated 10.5.2000, the nature of the work done by the petitioners as group clerk-cum-bill collectors similar to that of their counter part at town panchayat and the original appointment made in town panchayat should be taken into consideration. The petitioners are therefore entitled to the relief in terms of G.O.Ms.No.117, dated 10.5.2000 and the pay https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ should not be fixed purely on the basis of G.O.(2D) No.97, Rural Development (E5) Department, dated 1.10.2003 . Since the said G.O.(2D) No.97, Rural Development (E5) Department, dated 1.10.2003 restricts the claim of the petitioners, the present writ petitions have been filed. 7. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, it is stated in paragraph 11 as follows:- " With regard to the averments made in grounds 'e' and 'f' of the affidavit, it is submitted that in G.O.Ms.No.117, dated 10.5.2000, there is no specification about the Bill Collectors of Town Panchayats, who were absorbed as Group Clerk cum Bill Collectors in Village Panchayat. So, according to G.O.(2D) No.97, Rural Development (E5) Department, dated 1.10.2003 action has been initiated." 8. On a perusal of G.O.(2D) No.97, Rural Development (E5) Department, dated 1.10.2003, it is seen that in the first paragraph of the order, it is clearly shows that surplus bill collectors (group clerks) were absorbed to the newly formed panchayat and allowed to draw the same salary as of bill collectors of town panchayat. It is further stated that 28 persons appointed directly in panchayat union after 2.8.1970 as bill collectors-cum- group clerks were allowed to draw salary as applicable to bill collectors in panchayat union. The differentiation appears to be on the qualification viz., those, who have passed 10th standard have given Group-I and those who have not passed 10th standard are categorised as group-II. In paragraph 3 of the G.O., it is further clarified the differentiation as follows:- " Further, the group clerks-cum-bill collectors (appointed prior to 2.8.1970) were drawn their pay as equivalent to that of "Bill Collectors" in Town Panchayats and subsequently brought under the control of Block Development Officer. However, this had been objected in Audit during 1985-86 and therefore, their salary had been reduced as equivalent to that of Category II and the excess amount paid were ordered to be recovered. Certain employees filed O.As. Before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal for quashing reduction of pay and recovery of excess amount paid. Certain Group Clerks-cum-Bill Collectors appointed after 2.8.1970 had also filed O.As. Seeking to retain their pay as equivalent to that above category-I." 9. Therefore, while fixing the pay, the category of the petitioners i.e. Whether the petitioners fall under group-I or group-II shall also be considered. The very purpose of G.O.(2D) No.97, Rural Development (E5) Department, dated 1.10.2003, appears to be for sending a proposal for fixing the pay of group clerks- https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ cum-bill collectors based on the pay commission recommendations. There is no bar for the collector in considering the plea of the petitioners that they are entitled to the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.117, dated 10.5.2000. 10. In such view of the matter, there is no necessity to set aside the G.O.(2D) No.97, Rural Development (E5) Department, dated 1.10.2003, except to direct the District Collector to consider the plea of the petitioners that they are also entitled to the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.117, dated 10.5.2000 while considering the proposal for re-fixation of pay. The recovery order that has been issued to any one of the petitioners has been ordered to be released in terms of paragraph 6 of the G.O.(2D) No.97, Rural Development (E5) Department, dated 1.10.2003. Therefore, no further direction is required as the Government itself has granted the benefit. The Collector, competent authority shall take appropriate proceedings to send the proposal for fixing the pay of the group clerks-cum-bill collectors taking into consideration the recommendation of the pay commission, G.O.Ms.No.117, dated 10.5.2000 and other relevant materials as well. Such proposal is to be finalised within a reasonable period of time. These two writ petitions are ordered in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, WP.M.P.Nos. 19894, 26618 and 26619 of 2004 are closed. Ra Sd/- Asst. Registrar //True Copy// Sub Asst. Registrar To 1. The District Collector, Kanyakumari District. 2. The Panchayat Union Commissioner, Killiyur, Kanyakumari District 3. The Secretary to Govt., Rural Development (E5) Dept., Secretariat, Chennai.9. 4. The Director of Rural Development, Panagal Building,Chennai.15. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ + 1 cc to Government Pleader, SR No.35324 + 1 cc to Mr. R. Singgaravelan, Advocate SR No.33901 BK(CO) SR/26.8.2009 WP Nos. 16804 & 22017/2004 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/