T.Kalaiselvi v. The Additional Registrar General

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 05.06.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN and WMP(MD)No.10832 of 2026 T.Kalaiselvi ... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Additional Registrar General,

2. The Principal District Judge,

3. The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the Secretary, Account General, Chennai.

4. The Internal Audit Wing,

5. The Treasury Officer,

...Respondents

PRAYER :- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the Impugned Order No.B1/290/2025 dated 18.11.2025 1/5

issued by the Respondent No.2 and quash the same as being illegal and against the settled principles of law and further directing the respondents not to recovery of Rs.61,040/- from the petitioner's salary and subsequently direct the respondents to re-fix petitioner's pay scale in accordance with applicable rules and Government orders, without effecting any recovery from petitioner.. For Petitioner : Mr.S.M.A.Jinnah For Respondents : Mr.D.Venkatesh

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.) Challenging the order of re-fixation dated 18.11.2025 and the consequential recovery, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the grievance of the petitioner is only with regard to recovery and she is not challenging the order of re-fixation.

3. The said submission is placed on record. The petitioner is now working as Translator in the Principal District Court, Ramanathapuram, which is a Group-C post. It is well settled that as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Punjab and Others vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334, recovery from employees belonging to 2/5

Class III and Class IV service (or Group 'C' and Group 'D' service) is impermissible in law. The said ratio is squarely applicable to the petitioner's case. The respondents have already refixed the pay of the petitioner, and the petitioner has no grievance with regard to such re-fixation. The petitioner only seeks cancellation of the recovery amount.

4. In view of the above, the impugned order is quashed in respect of recovery alone. If any amount has been recovered pursuant to the impugned proceedings, the same shall be refunded to the petitioner.

5. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. [N.S.K., J.] & [M.J.R., J.] Index : Yes / No 05.06.2026 : Yes / No bala To

1. The Additional Registrar General,

2. The Principal District Judge, 3/5

3. The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by the Secretary, Account General, Chennai.

4. The Internal Audit Wing,

5. The Treasury Officer, 4/5

N.SATHISH KUMAR , J.

AND M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.

bala ORDER MADE IN DATED :

05.06.2026 5/5