1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.08.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR W.P.(MD).No.8592 of 2011 G.Nachiaponnu ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Accountant General (A & E), Anna Salai, Teynampettai, Chennai 600 018. 2.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District. ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the second respondent relating to R.C.No.463/A-2/2011 dated 21.07.2011 of the Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Paramakudi and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to make payment of pension and all other retirement benefits within a specified time frame that may be fixed by this court. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Visvalingam For respondents : Mr.S.Chandrasekar Govt. Advocate O R D E R Being aggrieved by the order of recovery of the second respondent, for the alleged excess payment made to the writ petitioner from 01.01.1999 to 01.01.2011, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition contending inter alia that the alleged excess payment was neither due to the misrepresentation or suppression of facts by the petitioner. 2.The impugned order is also assailed on the ground that no opportunity was given to the writ petitioner. In support of the above contention, the petitioner has placed the following decisions as detailed hereunder, wherein, the orders of recoveries were set aside: i)(1994) 2 S.C.C.521 ii)(1995) 1.S.C.C. Supp 18 iii)(2006) 1. M.L.J.695 iv)(2006) 1.M.L.J. 143 (D.8) v)(2006) 2 M.L.J.185 vi)W.P.No.21543 of 2004 dt. 05.04.2007 vii)(2007) W.L.R.1000 viii)W.P.(md).No.3000 of 2008 dt.01.04.2008 ix)W.P.(md).No.3303 of 2008 dt. 09.04.2008 x)W.P.(md).No.12251 of 2008 dt. 23.11.2010 xi)W.P.(md).No.7967 of 2008 dt. 23.11.2010 xii) W.P.(md).No.3038 of 2011 dt. 21.06.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3.On the averments and the grounds raised, Mr.S.Chandrasekar, learned Government Advocate was put on notice. He submitted that if there is any wrong fixation of scale of pay, the authorities are entitled to refix and consequently recover the excess payment. His submission is placed on record. 4.Heard the pleadings of the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate for the respondent. 5.Perusal of materials on record discloses that the petitioner who joined in the post of Secondary Grade Teacher in the Panchayat Union School, Keelanettur, Ilayankudi Panchayat Union on 02.01.1984 was promoted as Headmistress in June 2004. On 31.03.2011, she had retired from service. The pay of the writ petitioner for the post of Headmistress has been fixed in the year 2000. After fixing the scale of pay, for obtaining M.A degree, salary has been refixed. After 12 years, the Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Paramakudi has refixed the salary of the petitioner from 01.01.1999 alleging excess payment and sought to recover the same from the petitioner. Perusal of the impugned order perse reflects violation of principles of natural justice. It is well settled in catena of decisions stated supra, that the order of recovery involves civil consequence and therefore a reasonable opportunity ought to have been given to the petitioner. As violation of principles of natural justice is apparent, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order. For the above stated reasons, the impugned order passed by the second respondent in R.C.No.463/A-2/2011 dated 21.07.2011 is set aside. 6.This writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AE) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar(C.S) To 1.The Accountant General (A & E), Anna Salai, Teynampettai, Chennai 600 018. 2.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District. +1. CC to the Special Government Pleader , SR.No.25915 vs W.P.(MD).No.8592 of 2011 03.08.2011 TR : 05.08.2011: 2p/4c : IT https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/