A.MEENAKSHI SUNDARAM Vs. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By consent, both the writ appeal as well as the writ petition are taken up for final disposal.

(2.) The appellant/writ petitioner claims that he is an Orthopaedically Handicapped person and to that effect, the Regional Rehabilitation Centre for Physically Handicapped, Madurai, has also given a Certificate. The appellant/writ petitioner would further submit that he is hailing from a poor family with a rural background and on account of his physical disability, he was granted licence to run a toddy shop by the Government in the year 1981. The petitioner, having found that on account of running the toddy shop, his social stigma may attach to him, vide representation dated 10.06.1981, has surrendered the said licence for allotment and subsequently, it came to be cancelled on 03.07.1981.

(3.) Thereafter, the appellant/writ petitioner became a Government servant and was working as Assistant in the Government Headquarters Hospital, Devakottai from 28.09.1987. However, to his shock and surprise, nearly after 21 years, the fourth respondent had issued the impugned proceedings dated 01.02.2008 addressed to the third respondent with a copy marked to the appellant/writ petitioner stating that a sum of Rs.56,808/- (Rupees Fifty Six Thousand Eight Hundred and Eight only) towards the alleged loss to the Government along with the penal interest at the rate of 12% per annum amounting to Rs.1,46,565/- (Rupees One Lakh Forty Six Thousand Five Hundred and Sixty Five only) have to be recovered. The appellant/writ petitioner, on receipt of the said notice, sent a reply notice through his lawyer on 25.02.2008 requesting the authorities to furnish the calculation, however, it was not furnished to him.