Y.Kulandhairaj v. The Additional Director
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated: 08.08.2024 Coram:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA and CMP.Nos.27459, 27460 & 8205 of 2017 Y.Kulandhairaj
...Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Additional Director General of Prison, Chennai-600 008.
2.The Superintendent of Prisons, Central Prision, Coimbatore District.
...Respondents
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the 2 nd respondent issued in his proceedings No. 6063/Po1/2013-2 dated 25.07.2014, proceedings No.19473/Po-5/12 dated 25.07.2016 and in his proceedings No.19473/Po-5/12 dated 24.08.2016 issued against the petitioner.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.I.Thirumoorthy For Respondents : Mr.R.Kumaravel, Additional Government Pleader 1/4
ORDER
The writ petition is filed challenging the 2 nd respondents proceedings dated 25.07.2014, 25.07.2016 and 24.08.2016 against the petitioner.
2. The petitioner joined the Prison service on 17.06.1975 as Grade II warder and thereafter promoted as Grade I warder and Chief Head warder on 01.10.1998 and 08.08.2003 respectively. The petitioner was transferred to Central Prison in 2008 and he was retired from service on 31.05.2010. Four years after retirement of the petitioner, the 2 nd respondent passed recovery order dated 25.07.2014 for recovery of Rs.70,992/- for excess payment of wrong fixation of pay. The petitioner filed the present writ petition challenging the order for recovery of the aforesaid amount.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner retired as Chief Head warder which is Group 'C' post. The learned counsel relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab and others, etc. Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) reported in 2015 (5) CTC 455, submitted that in view of the law laidown by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid judgment, the recovery order was unsustainable. 2/4
4. The learned counsel for the respondent does not dispute that the petitioner retired in Group 'C' post.
5. In my view, the aforesaid judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court squarely applies to the present case. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid judgment after discussing the entire case law on the subject of recovery post retirement summarised few situations were recovery from the employees would be impermissible in law. In the summary one of the situations cited by the Hon'ble Supreme Court where recovery would be impermissible related to employees belonging to Class-III and Class-IV service (or Group 'C' and Group 'D' service).
In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 25.07.2014 is set aside. No costs. Consequently connected WMP's are closed.
08.08.2024 Index:Yes/No Speaking Order:Yes/No dsn 3/4
N.MALA,J.
dsn To 1.The Additional Director General of Prison, Chennai-600 008.
2.The Superintendent of Prisons, Central Prison, Coimbatore District.
08.08.2024 4/4