Madras High Court
S. Sethuraman … vs The Director Of Treasuries ... on 24 March, 2022
W.P. No. 3445 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 24.03.2022
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.D. AUDIKESAVALU
W.P. No. 3445 of 2017
and
W.M.P. Nos. 3418 and 27302 of 2017
S. Sethuraman … Petitioner
-vs-
1. The Director of Treasuries Accounts
Panagal Maligai,
Chennai – 15.
2. The Treasury Officer
District Treasury Office,
Villupuram District,
Villupuram. ... Respondents
Prayer:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
1950, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
records of the Second Respondent dated 18.07.2016 made in Na. Ka.
4060/2016/E2 quash the same and consequently directing the Respondents to
refund the deductions already made in the pension and pay the revised pension
at Rs. 10,500/-.
For Petitioner : Mr. M.Devaraj
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/7
W.P. No. 3445 of 2017
For Respondents : Mr. Vadivelu Deenadayalan
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
Heard Mr. M.Devaraj, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and
Mr. Vadivelu Deenadayalan, Learned Additional Government Pleader
appearing for Respondents and perused the materials placed on record, apart
from the pleadings of the parties.
2. The Writ Petition challenges the Proceedings No. Na. Ka. 4060/2016/E2
dated 18.07.2016 passed by the Second Respondent in which the Petitioner has
been informed that a sum of Rs. 2,38,000/- excessively paid to him would be
recovered in 20 installments of Rs. 11,500/- and the last installment of Rs.
8,600/- from his monthly pension.
3. This Court at the time of admission on 13.02.2017 had passed the
following self-explanatory order:-
“ The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner would submit that
the Petitioner is a pensioner, aged about 75 years and without
putting him on notice whatsoever, the impugned order of recovery
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P. No. 3445 of 2017
came to be passed and further add that the matter in issue is
squarely covered by the judgment reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334
[State of Punjab and Haryana -vs- Rafiq Maish (White Washer)]
and prays for appropriate orders.
2. Mr. K.Dhananjayan, Learned Special Government Pleader
accepts notice on behalf of the Respondents and prays for time to
get instructions.
3. Call on 13.03.2017 for order. Till then, there shall be an
order of interim stay.”
4. It is trite law that any administrative action which involves civil
consequences must be made consistently with the rules of natural justice,
meaning thereby that the person concerned must be informed of the case with
supporting evidence against him and he must be given a fair opportunity to
meet the case before an adverse decision is taken. The Government of Tamil
Nadu in G.O. Ms. No. 286, Finance (Pension) Department dated 28.08.2018
after referring to the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of
India in State of Punjab -vs- Rafiq Masih (Whitewasher) [(2015) 4 SCC 334],
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P. No. 3445 of 2017
has issued detailed instructions providing the manner in which any excess
amount paid to Government Servants/Pensioners/Family Pensioners would
have to be made.
5. There is nothing to show that either in the impugned order or in the
Counter-Affidavit filed by the Second Respondent that before the excess
payment claimed to have been made was effected, any show cause notice had
been issued to the Petitioner calling for an explanation from him with
supporting materials relied in that regard. Such incurable flaw in decision
making by the Respondents is in violation of the principles of natural justice
and would vitiate the impugned order. In that view of the matter, the impugned
order passed by the Second Respondent is set aside leaving it open to the
concerned authorities to appropriately deal with the matter following due
process. It shall be incumbent upon the concerned authorities to issue show
cause notice to the Petitioner along with working-sheet of the calculation for
the excess payment claimed to have been made to him and after affording full
opportunity of personal hearing to him and considering each of the objections
that may be raised by him, a reasoned order shall be passed on merits and in
accordance with law following the procedure laid down in the instructions in
G.O. Ms. No. 286, Finance (Pension) Department dated 28.08.2018 issued by
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P. No. 3445 of 2017
the Government of Tamil Nadu, uninhibited and uninfluenced by the earlier
order passed in the matter, and the decision taken shall be communicated to the
Petitioner under written acknowledgement.
6. In the event of the concerned authorities failing to initiate such
proceedings within 31.07.2022, the amount so far recovered from the Petitioner
shall be refunded to him under written acknowledgment and report in that
regard shall be filed before the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.
In fine, the Writ Petition is ordered on the aforesaid terms.
Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. No costs.
24.03.2022
kv
Index: Yes/No
Note: Issue order copy by 08.06.2022.
To
1. The Director of Treasuries Accounts
Panagal Maligai,
Chennai – 15.
2. The Treasury Officer
District Treasury Office,
Villupuram District,
Villupuram.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P. No. 3445 of 2017
Copy to
The Registrar (Judicial),
Madras High Court,
Chennai – 600 104.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P. No. 3445 of 2017
P.D. AUDIKESAVALU, J.
kv
W.P. No. 3445 of 2017
24.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
