T.VAITHILINGAM Vs. BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The orders of reduction of pay as well as the consequential orders of recovery are under challenge in the present writ petitions. All these writ petitioners are working as Panchayat Clerks in Village Panchayats. The revision of scale of pay was fixed to these writ petitioners based on the Government Orders as well as the pay rules in force. However, on account of certain audit objections, the competent authority issued the revised fixation of pay as well as the recovery of excess payment made to these writ petitioners.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the writ petitioners states that the impugned orders were passed without issuing any notice and opportunity to the writ petitioners. This apart, the writ petitioners are working as Panchayat Clerks which is a Group-III service and in respect of Group-III employees, such a recovery of excess payment is impermissible in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer), reported in (2014) 8 SCC 883.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the respondent though made a submission that the impugned order of recovery was issued based on the audit objections, he is unable to establish that a show cause notice was issued to these writ petitioners before issuing the impugned orders of recovery. In the absence of establishing that an opportunity was provided to these writ petitioners, the impugned orders of recovery cannot be sustained at all. As far as the reduction of scale of pay and recovery is concerned, this Court has elaborately adjudicated the judgment of the Supreme Court in W.P. [MD]No.23115 of 2015 dated 19.06.2019 and the relevant paragraphs are extracted hereunder: