C.Shoba v. The State Government Of Taminadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18.10.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI W.P(MD)Nos.22102, 22107, 22109 and 22110 of 2019 and W.M.P(MD)Nos.18886, 18890, 18894, 18897, 18898, 18900, 18899, 18902 of 2019 W.P.(MD)No.22102 of 2019:

C.Shoba

3. The Director, impugned order of recovery in Muu.Mu.No.5513/nibi1/2019-2, dated 10salary in Muu.Mu.No.5513/nibi1/2019-2, dated 10-2019 signed on W.P.(MD)No.22107 of 2019:

S.Mahalingam ... Petitioner 1/6

impugned order of recovery in Muu.Mu.No.5513/nibi1/2019-1, dated 10salary in Muu.Mu.No.5513/nibi1/2019-1, dated 10-2019 signed on W.P.(MD)No.22109 of 2019:

M.Sridevi 2/6

impugned order of recovery in Muu.Mu.No.5513/nibi1/2019-4, dated 10salary in Muu.Mu.No.5513/nibi1/2019-4, dated 10-2019 signed on W.P.(MD)No.22110 of 2019:

C.Jeyakani impugned order of recovery in Muu.Mu.No.5513/nibi1/2019-3, dated 10salary in Muu.Mu.No.5513/nibi1/2019-3, dated 10-2019 signed on 3/6

For Petitioners : Mr.R.Shriram (in all W.Ps) For Respondents : Mr.VR.Shanmuganathan (in all W.Ps) Special Government Pleader COMMON ORDER Since the issues involved in these Writ Petitions are one and the same, these Writ Petitions are heard together and disposed of by way of this common order.

2.Heard Mr.R.Shriram, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr.VR.Shanmuganathan, learned Special Government Pleader, who accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. 3.By consent of both parties, these Writ Petitions are taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself. 4.These Writ Petitions are filed to quash the impugned proceedings of the first respondent, dated 03.06.2019, consequential impugned Circular of the third respondent, dated 27.06.2019 as well as the impugned communication of the fourth respondent dated Nil-102019 signed on 11.10.2019. 5.According to the petitioners, they participated in the process of selection as per the notification issued by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission for the post of Steno Typist Grade III on 15.11.2007.

The petitioners were selected and after verification of certificates, the provisional list was published by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission on 02.12.2008, including the names of the petitioners. The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission issued appointment and Posting orders to the petitioners. The petitioners are discharging their duties without any blemish for the past years. The petitioners are continuing their services as Assistant. The Government decided to revise the scale of pay of new recruits and appointed One Man Committee. The said committee has recommended the Government to extend the benefits to its new recruits appointed between 01.01.2006 and 31.05.2009.

The said recommendations were accepted by the Government and the Government refixed the pay of Junior Assistants / Agricultural Officers and any other similar categories, selected prior to 01.06.2009 and appointed after 01.06.2009. The said benefits were not extended to the petitioners and the petitioners made request to extend the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.340, Finance (Pay Cell) Department, dated 26.08.2010. The third respondent sought for clarification from the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, by the letter, dated 18.07.2018 and the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission, by its letter dated 26.10.2018, clarified that the date of appointment of the petitioners, should be taken as 07.11.2008.

petitioners. However, the first respondent, by letter dated 03.06.2019, had withdrawn the said benefits given to the petitioners under the proceedings dated 20.12.2018, on the ground that the third respondent extended the said benefit to the petitioners and similarly placed persons without getting prior concurrence from the Finance Department.

6.Similarly placed persons joined together and filed Writ Petitions in W.P.(MD)Nos.15242 and 15089 of 2019, challenging the order of the first respondent dated 03.06.2019. This Court, by order dated 07.08.2019, dismissed the Writ Petitions as premature with liberty to the petitioners therein to approach the Court, if an order of recovery is passed.

7.The third respondent, by proceedings dated 27.06.2019, instructed the fourth respondent to recover the excess amount paid to the petitioners and the fourth respondent, by order dated Nil-102019 signed on 11.10.2019, circulated the said order to the petitioners, which are impugned in these Writ Petitions. 8.The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners contended that the respondents, without issuing any notice, are seeking to recover the alleged excess amount paid to the petitioners. The fourth respondent has refixed the scale of pay based on the clarification issued by the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission and revised the scale of pay is in order. The prior concurrence from the Finance Department, is an internal and routine process, for which, the petitioners should not be penalized and prayed for allowing the writ petitions.

9.The learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents submitted that the Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.340, Finance (Pay Cell) Department, dated 26.08.2010, is not applicable to the petitioners. The same is applicable only to the employees, who are appointed on or before 31.05.2009 and the petitioners are appointed only on 02.06.2009 and the scale of pay was revised without getting concurrence from the Finance Department, which is mandatory and recovery now sought to be made is valid and prayed for dismissal of the Writ Petitions.

10.The petitioners sought extension of benefit of G.O.Ms.No.340, Finance (Pay Cell) Department, dated 26.08.2010, to them also. The same benefit was extended to them after getting clarification from the Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission and by the impugned order dated 27.06.2019, the third respondent is seeking to recover certain amount alleged to have been paid in excess to the petitioners.

11.From the impugned order, it is seen that no notice was issued to the petitioners and the alleged excess amount was not mentioned in the impugned order. Further, it is stated that if any 5/6

excess amount is paid, it is to be recovered. Therefore, the impugned order dated Nil-10-2019 signed on 11.10.2019, is vague and issued without notice to the petitioners.

12.For the above reasons, the impugned orders are liable to be quashed and are hereby quashed. However, it is open to the respondents to issue notice to the petitioners, furnishing the particulars of excess amount alleged to have been paid to them and after hearing the petitioners and considering their objections, if any, pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law. 13.In the result, these Writ Petitions are allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CO) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar(CS ) To

1. The Secretary to Government, +1 CC to SPL GP SR-93233, 93226, 93228, 93245 +4 CC to Mr.R.SHRIRAM, Advocate SR-93691, 93694, 93695, 93693 W.P(MD)Nos.22102, 22107, 22109 and 22110 of 2019 18.10.2019 am MK (06.11.2019) 6P 10C 6/6