The District Educational Officer (Elementary) v. Chandrasekar
Case brief
What is this about?
Recovery from retired employee barred after five years; Rafiq Masih (2015) 4 SCC 334 relied on; audit-report recovery quashing confirmed; consequential direction for continued allowance disbursal without recovery from retirement gratuity refused; entitlement limited to correctly fixed amount; pay anomaly rectification; retirement gratuity protection; writ appeal under Clause 15 Letters Patent; Madurai Bench, Madras High Court; education department Ramanathapuram; District Treasury Officer; Principal Accountant General (A&E).
What did the court decide?
Writ appeal disposed of with modification: the consequential direction to continue disbursing the allowance without reduction or recovery from the retirement gratuity is set aside (petitioner entitled at most to the correctly fixed amount), while the quashing of the recovery is confirmed; connected miscellaneous petition C.M.P(MD)No.5241 of 2026 closed; no costs.