A.P.Kaliyamoorthi v. The Government Of Tamilnadu
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 10.09.2024 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH Writ Petition No.33624 of 2023 & WMP Nos.33456, 33455 & 33457 of 2023 and W.M.P.No.4981 of 2024 1.A.P.Kaliyamoorthi 2.T.Murugesan 3.G.Sundaram 4.N.Shanmugam 5.G.Kathamuthu 6.A.Boopalan 7.N.Jayaraman 8.K.John Kasi Rao 9.S.Gunasekaran 10.P.Murugesan 11.K.Mani 12.G.Srinivasan 13.Vaidyalingam 14.M.Selvarangam 15.P.Thirumalai 16.V.Subramanian 17.V.Ramalingam ....
Petitioners -Vs1 The Government Of Tamilnadu Represented By Its Principal Secretary Finance Department Fort St. George Chennai 600009.
2 The Principal Secretary To Government Public Works Department Fort St.
George Chennai 600009.
3 The Engineer In Chief 1 / 8
Water Resources Department And Chief Engineer (general) Public Works Department Chennai 600005.
4 The Deputy Chief Engineer WRO Additional Charge O/o.chief Engineer WRO Trichy Region Trichy 20.
5 The Executive Engineer WRO Cauvery Basin Sub-division Thanjavur.
....
Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the 4th respondent herein in Ne.Mu.Letter No. C4/9447/2020 dated 15.09.2023 and the consequential order of the 5th respondent herein issued Letter No. Ko.1603/2023/Ne.A.3 dated 19.9.2023 and quash the same and consequentially direct the respondents to confer all benefits to the petitioners with effect from 15.12.1984 with interest as per the amendment issued in G.O.Ms.No.12 Public Works (C2) Department dated 20.01.2009.
For Petitioners :
Mr.R.S.Anandan For Respondents :
Mr.P.Balathandayutham Special Government Pleader
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed challenging the letter dated 15.09.2023 of the fourth respondent and the consequent letter of the fifth respondent dated 19.09.2023 and for a direction to the respondents to confer all the benefits to the petitioners as per the amendment issued to G.O.Ms.No.12 dated 20.01.2009. 2 / 8
2. The petitioners were appointed as Irrigation Assistants in the Public Works Department during the years 1968 to 1977. The service particulars of the petitioners are tabulated hereunder:
S.No.
Petitioner Appt.Date Selection Grade Special Grade Senior Grade Date of Retirement 1.
A.P.Kaliyamoorthi 15.09.1973 15.09.1983 15.09.1993 14.09.2003 03.02.2009 2.
T.Murugesan 12.07.1977 12.07.1987 12.07.1997 12.07.2007 30.09.2009 3.
G.Sundaram 16.01.1968 16.01.1980 17.01.1990 17.01.2000 31.03.2000 4.
N.Shanmugam 06.05.1970 06.05.1985 06.05.1995 05.05.2005 03.02.2009 5.
G.Kathamuthu 01.08.1973 01.08.1983 01.08.1993 01.08.2003 03.02.2009 6.
A.Boopalan 25.02.1970 25.02.1985 25.02.1995 25.02.2005 31.12.2005 7.
N.Jayaraman 05.10.1972 17.03.1984 17.03.1994 17.03.2004 30.06.2008 8.
K.John Kasi Rao 02.09.1970 02.09.1985 02.09.1995 02.09.2005 03.02.2009 9.
S.Gunasekaran 07.08.1973 06.08.1983 01.06.1998 - 30.11.2002 10.
P.Murugesan 06.05.1970 06.05.1985 06.05.1995 05.05.2005 30.09.2008 11.
K.Mani 14.07.1972 13.07.1987 01.01.1998 - 30.09.2008 12.
G.Srinivasan 06.05.1970 06.05.1985 06.05.1995 06.05.2005 31.05.2006 13.
Vaidiyalingam 12.09.1972 12.09.1982 12.09.1992 12.09.2002 31.01.2008 14.
M.Selvarangam 04.08.1973 04.08.1983 04.08.1993 04.08.2003 30.11.2008 15.
P.Thirumalai 26.11.1970 26.11.1980 26.11.1990 26.11.2000 31.10.2003 16.
V.Subramanian 09.07.1970 09.07.1985 09.07.1995 09.07.2005 28.02.2009 17.
V.Ramalingam 27.05.1970 30.08.1985 30.08.1995 30.08.2005 30.06.2006
3. The further case of the petitioner is that on completion of 10 years of service as Irrigation Assistant, they are eligible for promotion to the post of Work Inspector. A clarification order was issued by the third respondent on 13.05.1999, whereby it was stated that the Irrigation Assistants who have put in 10 years of service will be eligible for the scale of pay of Rs.950-Rs.1500/- and those who have put in 20 years of service 3 / 8
are entitled for a scale of pay of Rs.1200-Rs.2040/-. The same was cancelled based on the letter of the second respondent dated 23.09.1999.
4. The petitioners moved the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal by filing O.A.Nos.7484 and 7626 of 1999. The applications were entertained and stay order was also passed by the Tribunal directing that no recovery must be made from the petitioners.
5. The applications were thereafter transferred to this Court, which were taken on file in W.P.Nos.39835 and 39836 of 2006 and which were disposed of by a common order dated 21.07.2010 in the following terms: "
The petitioners have filed the Original Applications on the file of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal challenging the orders passed by the respondents 1 and 3.
2. The Tribunal, while entertaining the above said applications, granted interim stay against the orders passed by the respondents 1 and 3. In view of the interim stay granted by the Tribunal, no action was taken against the petitioner. During the pendency of the present writ petitions, the Government have issued G.O.Ms.No.12, Public Works (C2) Department dated 20.01.2009 amending the Special Rules for the Tamil Nadu Engineering Subordinate Service with effect from 2nd August, 1984. By virtue of the 4 / 8
amendment, all the Irrigation Assistants, on completion of 10 years, are made eligible to get the scale of pay of Selection Grade and on completion of 20 years, they will be eligible to get the scale of pay of Special Grade. In that view of the matter, it is informed that no order is required, as all the Irrigation Assistants have retired from service.
In view of the amendment, the clarification order issued, which is under challenge, will automatically go in vain. Therefore, no orders are required to be passed in the present writ petitions, as nothing survives for consideration. Accordingly, the present writ petitions are closed. No costs."
6. The fourth respondent, instead of giving effect to the amendments made to the Special Rules, passed the impugned order dated 15.09.2023 and a consequential letter was issued by the fifth respondent directing to refix the scale of pay of the petitioners and to recover the excess payments made to the petitioners. The said order of refixation and recovery that was made after the retirement of the petitioners has been put to challenge in the present writ petition.
7. The respondents have filed a counter. They have taken a stand that the G.O.Ms.No.250 dated 21.03.1984 is concerned only with special temporary posts and not for movement of selection grade or special grade. According to the respondents, the petitioners have misquoted the Government Order and therefore the scale of pay that was fixed to the petitioners was found to be erroneous, which was sought to be 5 / 8
revised and the excess pay was also sought to be recovered from the petitioners. Accordingly, the respondents have justified the action taken by them.
8. Heard Mr.R.S.Anandan, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.P.Balathandayutham, learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents.
9. In the considered opinion of this Court, all the petitioners have retired long back during the period from 2002 to 2009. At this length of time, attempts are being made to refix the scale of pay of the petitioners and to recover the excess amounts paid to the petitioners. The employer-employee relationship ceases the moment the petitioners retire from service. All of a sudden, such proceedings cannot be initiated behind the back of the petitioners and that too when the petitioners are in the evening of their life. Hence, the revision of the scale of pay of the petitioners and the recovery proceedings initiated by the respondents are liable to be interfered with by this Court. There is yet another reason as to why recovery proceedings cannot be initiated against the petitioners. The so-called excess pay was made to the petitioners not due to the fault of the petitioners. Therefore, there is no question of recovering the amounts from the petitioners after all the petitioners have already retired from service long back.
10. In the light of the above discussion, the impugned proceedings of the 6 / 8
respondents are hereby quashed and this writ petition stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 10.09.2024 Index : Yes/No NCS : Yes/No KST To 1 The Government Of Tamilnadu Represented By Its Principal Secretary Finance Department Fort St. George Chennai 600009.
2 The Principal Secretary To Government Public Works Department Fort St.
George Chennai 600009.
3 The Engineer In Chief Water Resources Department And Chief Engineer (general) Public Works Department Chennai 600005.
4 The Deputy Chief Engineer WRO Additional Charge O/o.chief Engineer WRO Trichy Region Trichy 20.
5 The Executive Engineer WRO Cauvery Basin Sub-division Thanjavur.
7 / 8
N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.
KST 10.09.2024 8 / 8