A RAJALAKSHMI NANDINI Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY consent of the learned counsel on either side the writ petitions are taken up for final disposal. Heard both.

(2.) IN W. P. No. 13700 of 2004 the writ petitioner was appointed as a Headmistress of a middle school, namely, A. V. Primary School, Kizhapavur and Post, Tirunelveli District, from 01. 07. 1993, likewise the writ petitioner in W. P. No. 13701 of 2004 was appointed as a Headmistress of a middle school, namely, Sri Gandhi Vidya Salai, Kadabogathi and post, Tirunelveli District from 03. 04. 1995 and similarly the writ petitioner in W. P. No. 13702 of 2004 was appointed as a Headmaster of middle school, namely, Hindu Primary School, Arunaperi and Post, Tirunelveli Dist. , from 01. 11. 1993. It is not in dispute that at the time when the petitioners were appointed as Headmistresses / Headmaster, they were educationally qualified having Degree in Education but they were lacking five years of teaching experience as secondary grade teachers. It is also not in dispute that after their appointment, their appointment was regularised and the appointment was in respect of the approved posts and after the appointment they were granted Selection Grade after completion of ten years of service. It was thereafter after service of these candidates for more than ten years the second respondent namely the Director of Elementary Education has passed the impugned order on 27. 11. 2003 directing to recover the excess payment of salary on the basis that at the time of their appointment they were not having the required five years of teaching experience as Secondary Grade Teachers. Subsequent to the said order the consequential order of recovery has been passed by the concerned Additional Assistant Elementary Educational Officer of Tirunelveli District for recovery of the amount from the year of their appointment. On the admitted facts of appointment of these persons as Headmistress / Headmaster of the middle school and the appointment having been approved and subsequent benefits of selection grade have been given, the question that has to be considered is whether at this point of time the impugned order of recovery can be made.

(3.) THE fact that the appointment of these petitioners as Headmistress / Headmaster in the middle school in an approved post and confirmity of various benefits by selection are admitted in the counter affidavit filed by the respondents.