The Director of Public Health and v. M. Jayaseelan

JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.) This writ appeal has been directed against the order passed by the Writ Court dated 27.06.2025 made in W.P.No.23218 of 2025.

¶2The respondent was the writ petitioner, who, after rendering long years of service, retired from service on 31.05.2024. After his retirement, an order has been passed by the appellant Department on 21.06.2024 that, from 01.08.1997 till his superannuation date, that is on 31.05.2024, 5% special pay has been excessively paid, which comes to Rs.4,44,460/-, Page No.2 of 4 which has to be recovered from his retiral benefits. Subsequently, on

30.09.2024, an order was passed seeking objections, if any, from the employee/writ petitioner within fifteen days for recovering the said amount, which is allegedly paid excessively to the extent of Rs.4,44,460/-

¶3This order dated 30.09.2024 has been challenged before the Writ Court, where, the learned Writ Court, having considered the factual matrix, held that, since the respondent/writ petitioner retired on

31.05.2024 on superannuation and thereafter only it has got emanated from the employer only in the month of June, 2024 and followed by in the month of September, 2024, that is well after his superannuation and retirement, the same cannot be permitted and is impermissible in law as has been declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab and Ors. Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washers)1. Following the said dictum, the learned Judge has allowed the writ petition through the order impugned dated 27.06.2025.

¶4We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the learned Judge in following the dictum in White Washers' case (cited supra), as admittedly, the respondent/writ petitioner since retired on

31.05.2024, thereafter, since the said proceedings are issued for recovery of amount after retirement, such kind of situation is one of the situations where these kinds of recovery is impermissible, as has been declared by 1 2015 (4) SCC 334 Page No.3 of 4 the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of White Washers' case (cited supra).

¶5In that view of the matter, this writ appeal is liable to be dismissed, accordingly, it is dismissed. No cost. Consequently, C.M.P.No.9633 of 2026 is closed. (R.S.K.,J.) (N.S.,J.) 21-04-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order

(drm) To:

¶1The Director of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Chennai 6.

¶2The District Health Officer, Thirupathur. Page No.4 of 4

R.SURESH KUMAR, J. AND

N.SENTHILKUMAR, J.

(drm) 21-04-2026

Page No.1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 21-04-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR 1. The Director of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Chennai 6. 2. The District Health Officer Thirupathur. ..Appellant(s) Vs M. Jayaseelan ..Respondent(s) To set aside the order dated 27.06.2025 made in W.P.No.23218 of 2025 and allow this Writ Appeal. For Appellant(s): Ms.M.Sneha Special Counsel for Health and Family Welfare Department