Madras High Court
The District Collector And Secretary vs Jadeeda Saleem on 24 January, 2025
Author: M.S.Ramesh
Bench: M.S.Ramesh
W.A.(MD).No.1534 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 24.01.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH
AND
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE
W.A.(MD).No.1534 of 2024
and
C.M.P.(MD).No.11965 of 2024
1.The District Collector and Secretary,
Muqyyath Sha Sirguro,
Wakf Board College,
Madurai - 625 020.
2.The Principal,
Muqyyath Sha Sirguro,
Wakf Board College,
Madurai - 625 020. ... Appellants/Respondents 2 & 3
Vs.
1.Jadeeda Saleem,
Assistant Professor SG,
English Department,
Muqyyath Sha Sirguro,
Wakf Board College,
Madurai – 625020. ... 1st Respondent/Petitioner
2.The Joint Director of Collegiate Education,
Madurai Region,
Door No.268, Paalam Station Road,
Sellur,
Madurai - 625 002. ... 2nd Respondent/1st Respondent
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD).No.1534 of 2024
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, praying to
allow the Writ Appeal by setting aside the order passed in W.P.(MD).No.29153
of 2023, dated 29.04.2024.
For Appellants : Mr.S.P.Maharajan
For R-1 : Mr.V.Veerapandian
for M/s.Vast Law Associates
For R-2 : Mr.J.Ashok
Additional Government Pleader
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by M.S.RAMESH,J.)
This Writ Appeal has been filed against the order of the learned Single
Judge in W.P.(MD).No.29153 of 2023 dated 29.04.2024.
2. The cancellation of the incentive increment based on a Government
Order and consequential recovery proceedings of the excess payment made was
the subject matter before the Writ Court. The learned Single Judge had placed
reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of
Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) reported in AIR 2015 SC
696 and allowed the Writ Petition. This order is put under challenge in the
present appeal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that since the
delay in claiming refund of the excess payment made was based on audit
objections, the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in White Washer's
will not be applicable to the present case. This apart, he would also submit that
the delay is only 5 years and 40 days and therefore, the delay of 40 days could
be condoned.
4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the first respondent would submit
that the dictum laid down in White Washer's case has been clearly violated in
the instant case and since the learned Single Judge had also placed reliance on
the same and allowed the Writ Petition, no interference is required to the same.
5. Heard the learned counsels and perused the materials available on
record.
6. The learned Single Judge had placed reliance on the decision of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in White Washer's case and held that the recovery of
excess payment made, which was based on audit objections, over and above a
period of five years, is impermissible in law. The law laid down by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in White Washer's case has been consistently reiterated by the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Hon'ble Supreme Court in several of its other decisions, as well as by this Court
by holding that when anyone of the circumstances pointed out in White
Washer's case is violated, the consequential recovery proceedings is
impermissible in law.
7. The learned Single Judge had taken into account that the appellants
herein had initiated the recovery proceedings only on the basis of audit
objections and since it was over the period of five years, had allowed the Writ
Petition. Since the order is well in conformity with the law laid down by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in White Washer's case, we do not find any reason to
interfere with the same.
8. The learned Single Judge had also taken note of the fact that before the
impugned recovery was sought to be made, the first respondent herein was not
put on notice and therefore, had allowed the Writ Petition on the ground of
violation of the principles of natural justice also. In our view, such a finding is
well substantiated and on this ground also, the Writ Appeal does not deserve
consideration.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
9. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. There shall be no order
as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition stands closed.
(M.S.R.,J.) (A.D.M.C.,J.)
24.01.2025
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
Lm
To
The Joint Director of Collegiate Education,
Madurai Region,
Door No.268, Paalam Station Road,
Sellur,
Madurai - 625 002.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
M.S.RAMESH,J.
and
A.D.MARIA CLETE,J.
Lm
24.01.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
