S JAGADEESAN Vs. CHIEF EDUCATION OFFICER VELLORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the order of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, chennai, dated 8. 11. 2001 made in O. A. No. 2839 of 1995, the petitioner herein has filed the above writ petition to quash the same and issue direction to the second respondent to pay his pension and other retiral benefits as per the promotional post selection grade pay scale of Rs. 2000-3200 by the pay fixation order dated 9. 4. 1990.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, he was appointed as a Secondary Grade teacher on 25. 6. 1959 at Municipal High School, Arakkonam and his services were regularised with effect from 24. 8. 1972. He was awarded selection grade in the B. T. Assistant with effect from 24. 8. 19 82. When he was in selection grade of B. T. Assistant from 1972 to 1982 , V Pay commission submitted its report and revision of scale of pay came into effect from 1. 6. 1988. Based on the same, his scale of pay was refixed taking into consideration his initial service as teacher in the Elementary School in the year 1959 and t aking note of his completed 30 years of service, Special Grade scale of pay of Rs. 2000-3000 was fixed as Rs. 2,180/- on 1. 7. 1989. Based on the same, his pay was fixed at Rs. 2,675/- at the time when he approached the administrative Tribunal. However, the said fixation was considered as wrong in the Audit for the period 1989-90. According to the Audit Department, the applicant was given selection grade in the secondary grade scale of pay at rs. 1045-1775, its corresponding scale of pay as per the V Pay Commission is rs. 1640-2900. The Audit objection further shows that instead of fixing the petitioner's scale of pay consequent to the V Pay Commission revision in the scale at Rs. 1640-2900, his scale of pay was fixed erroneously in the scale of pay of Rs. 2000-3200. In other words, instead of fixing his scale of pay at rs. 1820/- his scale of pay was wrongly fixed at Rs. 2,180/ -. Based on the audit report, the Head Master, Government Higher Secondary School, Arakkonam, in his proceedings dated 20. 3. 1995, issued a recovery order for Rs. 34,995/- to be recovered from him from April 1995 onwards at the rate of Rs. 1,00 0/- per month till his retirement and the balance due from him to be recovered from d. C. R. G. The petitioner has challenged the same in O. A. No. 2839 of 1995 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Chennai, on various grounds. The Tribunal, by the impugned order, after finding that the petitioner was not given opportunity before revised fixation of scale of pay based on the Audit report, allowed the Original Application in part viz. to the extent of recovery of excess amount of Rs. 34,995/-, however, permitted the Department that pension and other retiral benefits will have to be done as per the revised scale of pay as ordered. Questioning the latter part of the order relating to pension and other retiral benefits, the petitioner has filed the above writ petition.

(3.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned government Advocate for the first respondent.