IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 20.10.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. HARIPARANTHAMAN W.P.No.223 of 2007 (O.A.No.3909/01) G.Subramaniyam .. Petitioner vs 1.The Accountant General, (Accounts and Entitlements), Tamil Nadu, Chennai. 2.The Treasury Officer, Erode. 3.The Head Master, Govt. Higher Secondary School, A Sembulicham Palayam, Bhavani, Erode District. .. Respondents The original application No.3909 of 2001 has been filed before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal and after abolition of the Tribunal, the same was transferred to this Court and renumbered as writ petition seeking relief to call for the records relating to the order of the first respondent dated 22.03.2000 issued in the Ref.No.Pen.25/I/S53-277/Rv./98-99, and order dated 27.06.2000 issued in the Ref.No.Pension 25/I/S19-115/Rn/2000-2001 and quash the same and further direct the respondents to permit the applicant to retain the pension paid to him with effect from 31.07.1991. For Petitioner ... Mr.R.Muthukannu For 1st Respondent ... Mr.V.Vijay Shankar For 2nd & 3rd Respondents ... Mr.V.Subbiah Special Govt. Pleader https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ O R D E R This writ petition has been filed to call for the records relating to the order of the first respondent dated 22.03.2000 issued in the Ref.No.Pen.25/I/S53-277/Rv./98-99, and order dated 27.06.2000 issued in the Ref.No.Pension 25/I/S19-115/Rn/2000-2001 and to quash the same and further direct the respondents to permit the applicant to retain the pension paid to him with effect from 31.07.1991. 2.It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was appointed as Watchman on contingent basis in Panchayat Union Middle School at Thavittupalayam in Erode District in the year 1961. In the year 1977, the said school got upgraded as High School and the service of the petitioner was also absorbed in the High School. He retired from service on 31.7.1992. After his retirement, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.147 Education Department dated 8.5.1998 regularising the service of the petitioner with effect from 1.4.1998 and also granted monetary benefits accordingly. He was also paid pension. While so, the impugned order dated Nil was issued by the Office of the Principal Accountant General (Accounts & Entitlements), Tamil Nadu directing the treasury officer to recover the excess pension paid for the period from 1.8.1992 to 7.5.1998 from the future pension of the petitioner and another impugned order dated Nil was also passed by them on the same lines intimating to the petitioner and Headmaster, Government Higher Secondary School, A.Sembulichampalayam, Erode. The petitioner has filed O.A.No.3909 of 2001 (W.P.No.223 of 2007) as against the above said two impugned orders. While admitting the Original Application, the Tribunal granted stay of recovery on 22.6.2000. In view of the stay, no recovery was made. 3.No counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents. 4.I have heard the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side. 5.The impugned order of the first respondent that was addressed to the Treasury Officer to recover the excess paid pension for the period from 1.8.1992 to 7.5.1998 from the future pension of the petitioner without giving any reason. The said order is extracted hereunder: "It is seen from G.O.No.147, School Education (R1) dated 8.5.1998 that Shri G.Subramanian, Watchman, Government High School, A. Sembulichampalayam, Bhavani Taluk, (Holder of Pension Payment Order No.A 980367/EDN.) has been brought on to regular establishment with effect from 1.4.1998 with monetary benefit of arrears of fixation from 8.5.1998. Hence, pension is admissible from 8.5.1998 only. The date of commencement of pension may be corrected as 8.5.1998 in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the Pension Payment Order No.A 980367/EDN treating this letter as authority and arrangements may be made to recovery the excess paid pension for the period from 1.8.1992 to 7.5.1998 from his future pension." 6.From the above, it is clear that the impugned orders have been passed to recover the excess paid pension from 1.8.1992 to 7.5.1998 from the future pension of the petitioner without any valid reason. Furthermore, no notice was issued to the petitioner and the petitioner was not heard before ordering the recovery. The petitioner is now aged about 80 years. In such circumstances, taking into account the age of the petitioner and also the fact that the petitioner was not heard before passing the impugned orders, the impugned orders are liable to be quashed and accordingly, the same are quashed. 7.The writ petition is allowed on the above terms. No costs. Sd/ Asst. Registrar /True Copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar cla To 1.The Accountant General, (Accounts and Entitlements), Tamil Nadu, Chennai. 2.The Treasury Officer, Erode. +One C.C. to The Government Pleader SR.64713 W.P.No.223 of 2007 BS (CO) KSA (25/11/2011) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/