Madurai Bench quashes Tahsildar’s order to recover salary from him
MADURAI: P.R. Sonai (68), a former Village Assistant in Madurai North taluk, is an exception among his counterparts.
He continued to work for nearly two years beyond the date of his superannuation, because the superior officials failed to take note of the retirement date!
Cashing in on the opportunity, he too did not enlighten the officials concerned.
But the fault cost him dear as he was slapped with an executive order to recover the salary paid during the two years. Subsequently, he had to fight a long legal battle until the Madras High Court could come to his rescue recently.
As per Government regulations, which permit Village Assistants to serve until the age of 60, Mr. Sonai should have retired on March 3, 1999. However, he served the village until January 31, 2001 and received a total of Rs.55,151 towards monthly salary. Thereafter, the Madurai North Tahsildar on June 24, 2005 directed him to return the salary paid beyond his retirement date.Immediately, the former Village Assistant filed a writ petition challenging the demand made by the Tahsildar.
Allowing his petition, a single judge of the High Court quashed the order seeking recovery of salary. Aggrieved over the single judge’s order, the Collector filed a writ appeal. Dismissing the writ appeal, a Division Bench, comprising Justice F.M. Ibrahim Kalifulla and Justice S. Palanivelu, held that an employee was entitled to receive monthly salary for the service rendered by him beyond his date of superannuation. However, the additional service period need not be considered for calculating other terminal benefits, they said.
Printer friendly
page Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
