The State Of Tamilnadu, v. R.Pandimeenal,

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 13.06.2016 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE NOOTY.RAMAMOHANA RAO and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR Writ Appeal (MD) Nos.26, 889 and 892 of 2016 & C.M.P(MD)Nos.158, 5359 and 5366 of 2016 Writ Appeal (MD) No.26 of 2016 -Vs-.

1.Tmt.R.Pandimeenal, aside the order dated 18.04.2013 in W.P.(MD) No.9530 of 2010. Prayer in WP(MD). 9530/ 2010 :

and direct the 3rd and 4th Respondents to refund the amount to the petitioner to the tune of Rs.55,811/- which was already recovered : Mr.K.Mariyappan *** Writ Appeal (MD) No.889 of 2016 -Vs1.Tmt.A.R.Meenal, aside the order dated 18.04.2013 in W.P.(MD) No.9531 of 2010. Prayer in WP(MD). 9531/ 2010 :

and direct the 3rd and 4th Respondents to refund the amount to the petitioner to the tune of Rs.55,811/- which was already recovered

: Mr.S.N.Ravichandran Writ Appeal (MD) No.892 of 2016 -Vs1.Tmt.I.Mahalakshmi, aside the order dated 18.04.2013 in W.P.(MD) No.9529 of 2010. Prayer in WP(MD). 9529/ 2010 :

and direct the 3rd and 4th Respondents to refund the amount to the petitioner to the tune of Rs.53,200/- which was already recovered

: Mr.S.N.Ravichandaran *** COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by NOOTY.RAMAMOHANA RAO,J) These appeals are preferred aggrieved by that part of the order of the learned Single Judge whereby and whereunder the proposed recovery of the amounts already paid in favour of the writ petitioners has been quashed. It is a settled principle of law that so long as the claim for payment is not a fraudulent one and it is not the result of any misrepresentation on the part of the employee concerned, such recoveries are not to be ordered normally inasmuch as the Government servant would not have kept away the money which he has received in anticipation that the same may have to be refunded to the Government later on.

Further, we are also informed that when a similar lis has fallen for consideration, another Division Bench by its judgment dated 02.04.2004 rendered in W.A.(MD) Nos.249 of 2004 and batch, has dismissed the appeal. In that view of the matter, for the same set of reasons which are set out by the Division Bench in its judgment dated 02.04.2004 rendered in W.A.(MD) Nos.249 of 2004 and batch, we also dismiss these Writ Appeals holding that no recovery should be made from the salary of the respondents/writ petitioners. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CS-II) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Secretary to Government, Education Department, Fort St.George, Chennai - 9. Thirupathur, Sivagangai District.

+1 CC to Mr.SINGARAVADIVEL, Advocate, SR No.30072 Writ Appeal (MD) Nos.26, 889 and 892 of 2016 13.06.2016 srm SH/NGM-MP:01.07.2016:4P/6C