Allowed

S.Srinivasagam v. The District Treasury Officer

Madras HC6 Jun 2024WP(MD)/11846/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court set aside an order by the respondents denying a higher pension rate calculated under a specific Government Order. The respondents were directed to refix the pension after affording an opportunity of hearing, and any recovery made was ordered to be reimbursed.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order set aside; respondents directed to refix pension after affording opportunity of hearing and reimburse any recoveries made.

S.Srinivasagam Vs The District Treasury Officer — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

WP(MD). No.11846 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

Date : 06.06.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE Ms.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA

¶6

WP(MD) No.11846 of 2024 and WMP(MD) Nos.10559 and 10560 of 2024

¶7

S.Srinivasagam ... Petitioner

¶8

¶9

The District Treasury Officer, District Treasury Office, Collectorate Campus, Theni 625531.

¶10

The Assistant Treasury Officer, Sub Treasury Office, Uthamapalayam 625 533, Theni District.

¶11

... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER :- Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 2^nd respondent relating to his impugned order in Na.Ka.No. 1148(A)/2022/A4, dated 20.01.2023 and quash the same as illegal and directing the respondents to pay the pension to the petitioner, which he received before the impugned order based on the earlier calculation by fixing his pension as Rs. 39,993/-.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.B.Anandan For Respondents : Mr.J.Ashok Additional Government Pleader

¶14

1/5

¶15

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

¶16

WP(MD). No.11846 of 2024

¶17

ORDER

¶18

Heard Mr.B.Anandan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.J.Ashok, learned Additional Government Pleader, for the respondents.

¶19

2 .This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order

¶20

of the 2^nd respondent dated 20.01.2023 and direct the respondents to pay the pension to the petitioner, which he received before the impugned order, basing upon the earlier calculation by fixing the pension as Rs. 39,993/-.

¶21

3 . By consent of both parties, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of admission itself.

¶22

4 . The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

¶23

petitioner was originally paid with pension of Rs.55,775/- from the year 2018 pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.145 dated 06.07.2018.

¶24

2/5

¶25

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

¶26

WP(MD). No.11846 of 2024

¶27

5. The petitioner, who is a retired employee and a senior citizen of

¶28

84 years, has been served with the recovery order on the ground that fixation of his pension was made wrongly. Even for any valid reasons, the fixation is wrong, as per the Government order cited supra, no recovery of this nature can be made against retired employee. However, it is up to the respondents to refix the pension, if at all there is any wrong fixation by affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶29

6. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 20.01.2023 is set aside and the respondents are directed to refix the pension by affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, if the respondent chooses to do so. If any recovery is made so far, the same shall be reimbursed to the petitioner forthwith. No costs. Consequently connected Miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶30

06.06.2024 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No RR

¶31

3/5

¶32

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

¶33

WP(MD). No.11846 of 2024

¶34

¶35

The District Treasury Officer, District Treasury Office, Collectorate Campus, Theni 625531.

¶36

The Assistant Treasury Officer, Sub Treasury Office, Uthamapalayam 625 533, Theni District.

¶37

4/5

¶38

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

¶39

WP(MD). No.11846 of 2024

¶40

R.N.MANJULA, J.

¶41

¶42

ORDER IN WP(MD) No. 11846 of 2024

¶43

Date : 06.06.2024

¶44

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

¶45

5/5

S.Srinivasagam v. The District Treasury Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Srinivasagam v. The District Treasury Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Leelavathi G Vs The District Level Empowered Committee

Periyasamy .K Vs The Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation (Kumbakonam) Ltd.

Dhandapani v Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

D.Jane Mercy Arputhamani Vs The State of Tamilnadu

Rajeshwaran Vs The Government of Tamilnadu

Kannan Vs The Managing Director