Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Outcome
Partly allowed
Accordingly, this Writ Petition is partly allowed, while sustaining the order of re-fixation, the order of recovery alone is set aside
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 226
Judgment
W.P.No.22630 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 24.06.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIANANDTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDERWrit Petition No.22630 of 2025and WMP No.25477 of 2025M.Pauldurai ... PetitionerVs.1. The Registrar General The Hon'ble High Court of Madras, High Court Building, Chennai 600 104. 2. The Principal District Judge, Villupuram District Court, Villupuram. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for, to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records in impugned proceeding in D.No.4138/2025 dated 13.06.2025 passed by the second respondent for recovery of excess claim of pay and allowance for the period from 20.05.1994 to 31.05.2025 amounting Rs.1,61,218/- from the petitioner and quash the same.1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.22630 of 2025For Petitioner: Mr.G.BalamanikandanFor Respondents: Mr.N.K.Kanthimathi, for RR1 & 2********ORDER(Order of the Court was delivered by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.) Challenge is to the order of recovery passed by the second respondent, consequent upon refixation of the salary of the petitoner, which was erroneously fixed. 2. As regards the recovery, the issue is 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. As regards the re-fixation, we do not see any grievance for the petitioner as the wrong fixation has been rectified. Hence, while sustaining the re-fixation, we only set aside the orders of recovery. Any amount recovered pursuant to the orders impugned in this writ petition, the same shall be repaid to the petitioner within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.22630 of 20253. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is partly allowed, while sustaining the order of re-fixation, the order of recovery alone is set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.) (K.SURENDER, J.)24.06.2025jvInternet: YesIndex: NoNeutral Citation : NoSpeaking orderTo1. The Registrar General The Hon'ble High Court of Madras, High Court Building, Chennai 600 104. 2. The Principal District Judge, Villupuram District Court, Villupuram.3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.22630 of 2025R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.andK.SURENDER , J. jvWrit Petition No.22630 of 202524.06.20254/4
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly, this Writ Petition is partly allowed, while sustaining the order of re-fixation, the order of recovery alone is set aside
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 226.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.