Madras High Court
B.Madhappan vs The Registrar General on 12 March, 2021
Author: Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
Bench: Sanjib Banerjee, Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
W.P.No.6437 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 12.03.2021
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.SANJIB BANERJEE, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
W.P.No.6437 of 2021
B.Madhappan .. Petitioner
-vs-
1. The Registrar General,
High Court Madras,
Chennai – 600 104.
2. The Principal District Judge,
Erode District,
Erode.
3. The Fourth Additional District judge,
Bhavani.
4. V.Ganesamoorthi .. Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying for issue of Writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent to
refund the amount of Rs.84,878/- which was paid on 14.06.2016 at
the insistence of the fourth respondent in the light of the judgment of
__________
Page 1 of 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.6437 of 2021
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Punjab & others etc. vs. Rafiq
Masih (white washer) etc. in C.A.No.11527 of 2014 (Arising out of
SLP(C) No.11684 of 2012) dated 18.12.2014 and the subsequent
G.O.Ms.No.286, Finance (Pension) Department dated 28th August 2018
issued by the Government of Tamilnadu along with interest to be
recovered from the fourth respondent who insisted the excess
payment on erroneous special grade fixation in the cadre of Process
Server/ Junior Bailiff without any authority of law.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Nagarajan
For Respondents : Mr.E.K.Kumresan
for R1 to R3
ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by The Hon'ble Chief Justice) The petitioner seeks the refund of an amount of Rs.84,878/- that was extracted from the petitioner on account of excess payment.
2. The petitioner relies on a judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court for such purpose.
__________ Page 2 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.P.No.6437 of 2021
3. It does not appear that the relevant judgment was brought to the notice of the Court at the time that the refund was made. As a consequence, the relevant order directing refund could have been challenged as erroneous, but no ground is made for reviewing the previous order to direct refund at this stage. In any event, the present petition is belated.
4. W.P.No.6437 of 2021 is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.
(S.B., CJ.) (S.K.R., J.)
12.03.2021
Index : No
bbr/vsi
To:
1. The Registrar General, High Court Madras, Chennai – 600 104.
2. The Principal District Judge, Erode District, Erode.
3. The Fourth Additional District judge, Bhavani.
__________ Page 3 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.P.No.6437 of 2021 THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.
bbr/vsi W.P.No.6437 of 2021 12.03.2021 __________ Page 4 of 4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/