IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 22.10.2010 CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.HARIPARANTHAMAN W.P.No.42238 of 2006 A.Bhoopalan ... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by the Secretary to Government, Adi Dravidar and Tribunal Welfare Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 9. 2. The Director, Adi Dravidar and Tribunal Welfare, Chepauk, Chennai – 5. 3. The District Adi Dravidar Welfare Officer, Thiruvannamalai District. Thiruvannamalai. 4. The Principal Accountant-General (A & E), Tamil Nadu, 261, Anna Salai, Chennai – 18. ... Respondents PRAYER: This Writ Petition came to be numbered under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by way of transfer of O.A.No.5660 of 2000 from the file of Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal with a prayer, to call for the records on the file of the fourth respondent namely the Accountant-General (A&E), Chennai – 18, in his proceedings No.AG (A & E) / Pension 9 / III / B8-344 / 200-2001 / 911 dated 23.06.2000 as illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable being violative of rules and principles of natural justice and quash the same and thereby direct the respondents herein to pay full pension without any recovery pay full Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity amount and also all other retirement and pensionary benefits to the petitioner. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Srinivasan For Respondents 1-3 : Ms.C.Ravi For Respondent – 4 : Mr.Vijayshankar https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ O R D E R Heard Mr.S.Srinivasan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.C.Ravi, learned counsel for the respondents 1 to 3 and Mr.Vijayshankar, learned counsel for the fourth respondent. 2. The petitioner was promoted as Headmaster of Primary School with effect from 07.04.1989. He was fixed in the scale of Rs.2000-60-2300-75-3200 based on G.O.Ms.No.1381, Education Department, dated 05.10.1990. After 12 years, on the eve of his retirement, the impugned order dated 23.06.2000 was passed by the fourth respondent stating that the pay was erroneously fixed as if he was promoted as Headmaster on 01.06.1988. The fixation of pay on 07.04.1989 was not due to any misrepresentation made by the petitioner. In these circumstances, the petitioner could not be blamed. There is no reason adduced for seeking to revise the pay and to reduce the same after 12 years. 3. The impugned order was passed on 23.06.2000, while the petitioner was to retire on 30.06.2000. He was paid pension based on his fixation made on 07.04.1989, that is, sought to be reduced and re-fixed and also recovery is sought to be made. 4. The impugned order was passed without any notice. As stated above, the alleged erroneous fixation in the year 1989 was not due to any misrepresentation from petitioner. The petitioner retired from service 10 years back. 5. Taking in to account, the said circumstances of the case, I am of the view, a decision of this Court in D.Palavesamuthu Vs. Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, represented by its Registrar, Chennai and others reported in (2006)1 M.L.J.143 directly applies to the facts of the case. Para 5 of the said judgment is extracted here-under:- "As rightly pointed out, the very same Tribunal has not accepted the claim of the applicant/petitioner herein. We are of the view that the course and method adopted by the Tribunal cannot be appreciated in the case of the petitioner. Even if it is accepted for the argument sake that salary of the petitioner is fixed in a wrong scale of pay, it is the fault committed by the Department and their Officers, for which the petitioner should not be penalised after a lapse of number of years that too after retirement of the petitioner." 6. Further, the impugned order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 7. Accordingly, the impugned order is quashed and the writ petition is allowed. No costs. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar r n s To 1. The Secretary to Government, Adi Dravidar and Tribunal Welfare Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 9. 2. The Director, Adi Dravidar and Tribunal Welfare, Chepauk, Chennai – 5. 3. The District Adi Dravidar Welfare Officer, Thiruvannamalai District. Thiruvannamalai. 4. The Principal Accountant-General (A & E), Tamil Nadu, 261, Anna Salai, Chennai – 18. 1 cc To Mr..Vijayshankar, Advocate, SR.76495 1 cc To The Government Pleader, SR.76495 W.P.No.42238 of 2006 SA(CO) PMK.09.11.2010 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/