V THANIGAIMALAI Vs. ENGINEER-IN-CHIEF WRO & CHIEF ENGINEER (GENERAL)
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Engineer-In-Chief Wro And Chief Engineer (General)
Click here to view full judgement.
P. Velmurugan, J. -
(1.) The challenge made in this writ petition is to the circular bearing No.CI(2)/935/2001 dated 8.4.2002 issued by the first respondent and the proceedings of the fourth respondent in Lr.No.Nee 1/76/2006-1 and Lr.No.Nee1/76/2006-3 dated 27.3.2006 and Lr.No.E1/76/2006-4 dated 28.03.2006 and the proceedings of the second respondent in Pen 15/II dated Nil and P15/2/T8-184/REV/2006-2007/2254 and PPO.No.C8296PW/ dated 07.06.2006.
(2.) Despite several opportunities granted to the petitioner and his name having been printed in the cause list, there is no representation on his behalf either in person or through counsel. However, due to efflux of time, this Court is inclined to proceed with the matter on merits.
(3.) According to the petitioner, he served as Assistant Executive Engineer of Public Works Department and retired from service on 30.06.2001 on attaining the age of superannuation. He received his pensionary benefits. Subsequently, based on the circular of the first respondent dated 08.04.2002, the fourth respondent unilaterally refixed the pay of the petitioner and revised his pension and ordered for recovery of the alleged excess amount paid to him. It is the grievance of the petitioner that without giving any notice and providing an opportunity of hearing, the fourth respondent has taken such action and hence, the same is arbitrary, illegal and violative of the principles of natural justice. Hence, this writ petition.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.