The Commissioner vs J.S.Ali
2025 Latest Caselaw 2956 Mad

Madras High Court

The Commissioner vs J.S.Ali on 18 February, 2025

Author: R.Subramanian

Bench: R.Subramanian

                                                                             W.A.No. 1573 of 2024
                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
                                                 DATED: 18.02.2025
                                                        CORAM:
                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN
                                                    AND
                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN

                                               W.A.No. 1573 of 2024
                                                       and
                                              C.M.P.No. 10950 of 2024

                     1. The Commissioner,
                       Villupuram Municipality, Villupuram - 605 602.

                     2. The Commissioner,
                       Thiruthuraipoondi Municipality,
                       Thiruthuraipoondi - 614 713.

                     3. The Commissioner,
                       Panruti Municipality, Panruti.                            ...Appellants

                                                         Vs.

                     1.J.S.Ali

                     2. Director of Municipality Administration,
                       No.75, MRC Nagar, Santhome High Road,
                       Chennai - 600 028.

                     3. Director,
                      Local Fund Audit,
                      Integrated Complex for Finance Department,
                      4th Floor, Nandanam,
                      Saidapet, Chennai - 600 035.

                     4. The Regional Director of Municipal Administration,
                       Vellore - 600 0 12.                                   ... Respondents
                     1/6


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                        W.A.No. 1573 of 2024


                     Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the
                     order dated 28.06.2023 made in W.P.No.32885 of 2022.

                                        For Appellants     : Mr.P.Dinesh Kumar
                                        For Respondent     : Mr.Mr.Jaya Prakash Narayanan for R1
                                                             Mr.C.Selvaraj
                                                            Addl. Government Pleader for R2 to R4




                                                         JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was made by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.)

We see no ground with the order of the writ Court in as much as the

case on hand is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in State of Punjab and Others Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer's

case) reported in AIR 2015 SC 696.

2. The order impugned in the writ petition itself shows that the excess

payment was made prior to 2000 - 2001 and the same was raised as an audit

objection even in the year 2000 - 2001. No action was taken. The

respondent was appointed as Bill Collector in the year 1992. Though it was

stated that the appointment is without the permission of the Commissioner,

Municipal Administration, no action was taken pursuant to the said audit

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

objection. Again, in the audit objections for the year 1999 - 2000, it was

stated that the approval of the Government must be obtained for having

appointed the respondent as a Bill Collector. Even then, nothing was done.

We are informed that necessary approvals have been obtained.

3. While the respondent was to retire on 30.06.2022, the order

impugned in the writ petition came to be passed, withholding the retiral

benefits of the respondent and also reserving right to initiate disciplinary

proceedings or proceedings by the Directorate of Vigilance and Anti

Corruption etc., This order, in our considered opinion, is beyond the

jurisdiction of the employer. After all, the respondent has served the

Municipal Corporation from 1992, till 2022 for nearly 30 years. Denial of

retirement benefits in the case on hand would amount to taking away the

right that is vested in the employee.

4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Punjab and Others Vs.

Rafiq Masih (White Washer's case) had held that where excess payment

has been made in excess of five years before the order of recovery is issued,

recovery cannot be made at all. We are therefore, unable to fault the writ

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Court for having allowed the writ petition. This Writ Appeal therefore, fails

and it is accordingly, dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected

miscellaneous petition is closed.

                                                                  (R.S.M., J.)     (G.A.M., J.)
                                                                            18.02.2025
                     kkn

                     Index: No
                     Speaking order
                     Neutral Citation : No

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

To:

1. Director of Municipality Administration, No.75, MRC Nagar, Santhome High Road, Chennai - 600 028.

2. Director, Local Fund Audit, Integrated Complex for Finance Department, 4th Floor, Nandanam, Saidapet, Chennai - 600 035.

3. The Regional Director of Municipal Administration, Vellore - 12.

4. The Commissioner, Villupuram Municipality, Villupuram - 605 602.

5. The Commissioner, Thiruthuraipoondi Municipality, Thiruthuraipoondi - 614 713.

6. The Commissioner, Panruti Municipality, Panruti.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.

and G. ARUL MURUGAN, J.

KKN

and

18.02.2025

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis