The State Of Tamil Nadu v. J Padmanabhan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11.02.2026 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SHAMIM AHMED
1. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep. By its Additional Chief Secretary to the Government Home (Police) Department Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Director General of Police (L&O) (Head of Police Force) Office of the Director General of Police Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004.
3. The Commissioner of Police Chennai City Police, Vepery Chennai - 600 007.
4. The Joint Commissioner of Police Administrative Officer, South Zone Greater Chennai police, Chennai.
..
Appellants Vs.
J.Padmanabhan ..
Respondent Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order passed in W.P.No.32575 of 2024 dated 10.10.2025. For the Appellants :
Mr.E.Veda Bagath Singh Special Government Pleader
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.) This intra-Court appeal has been directed against the order passed by the Writ Court dated 10.10.2025 made in W.P.No.32575 of 2024.
2. The respondent was the writ petitioner, who was initially enlisted as a Grade - II Police Constable in the Tamil Nadu Police Service on 20.02.1986. After long years of service, he attained superannuation on 31.10.2022 and retired peacefully, however, after his retirement, on 27.11.2022, an order has been passed, whereby, it was stated that his pay has been wrongly fixed and therefore, it leads to recovery to the extent of a sum of Rs.1,32,448/-.
3. The said order was under challenge before the Writ Court. The learned Judge who heard the said writ petition applied the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State Of Punjab & Ors vs Rafiq Masih (White Washer)1 and set aside the order impugned before the Writ Court and allowed the said writ petition.
1 AIR 2015 SUPREME COURT 696
4. The said order passed by the Writ Court does not warrant any interference at our hands in view of the law having been declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Whitewasher's case (cited supra), where, situations where such kind of recovery could be impermissible since having been declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the present situation, where the employee since has retired from service, after retirement, recovery cannot be made against him. That was also one of the situations, under which, such recovery since has been declared as an impermissible one, the approach of the learned Judge cannot be found fault with.
5. Therefore, the order passed by the Writ Court since has to be sustained, it is sustained. The writ appeal fails and hence, it is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, C.M.P.No.1144 of 2026 is closed. (R.S.K., J.) (S.S.A., J) 11.02.2026 Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order Internet:Yes/No Index:Yes/No (drm)
To:
1. The Additional Chief Secretary to the Government The State of Tamil Nadu Home (Police) Department Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Director General of Police (L&O) (Head of Police Force) Office of the Director General of Police Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004.
3. The Commissioner of Police Chennai City Police, Vepery Chennai - 600 007.
4. The Joint Commissioner of Police Administrative Officer, South Zone Greater Chennai police, Chennai.
R. SURESH KUMAR, J.
AND SHAMIM AHMED, J.
(drm) 11.02.2026