Retrospective re-fixation of salary and pensionary benefits post-retirement is not in accordance with law: Madras HC

The petitioner was retired from service by superannuation and hence, the employer – employee relationship between the petitioner and the University had come to an end and hence, the University holds no Authority to re-fix the salary and the consequential benefits of the petitioner.

Madras High Court

Madras High Court: In a writ petition filed by the petitioner who was working as a Lab Assistant in the Madurai Kamaraj University (‘University’) and retired from service on in 1988, to quash the order passed by the University and consequently direct the State, and the University to reimburse the recovered amount to the petitioner with interest, R.N. Manjula, J., while quashing the impugned order passed by the University, has directed the State and University to reimburse the recovered amount to the petitioner with interest within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

The petitioner submitted that by virtue of the impugned order, the petitioner’s pension was reduced because the petitioner’s pay scale was wrongly fixed. The Local Fund Audit Department has raised an objection that the pay fixation of the petitioner was wrongly made in higher scale of pay. The University reduced the pension amount in December 2023 and passed the impugned order on 18-03-2023. Before passing the impugned order, the University had not issued any prior notice to the petitioner. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed the present petition.

The Court noted that the petitioner was retired from service by superannuation and hence, the employer – employee relationship between the petitioner and the University had come to an end and hence, the University holds no Authority to re-fix the salary and the consequential benefits of the petitioner.

After relying on Manonmaniam Sundaranar University v State Of Tamil Nadu1, wherein it was held that only the Syndicate has the power to appoint the University staffs and fix their emoluments, the Court opined that the re-fixation of salary and consequential pensionary benefits post-retirement retrospectively, is not in accordance with law. Hence, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside.

[R.Rajamani v. State of Tamil Nadu, 2024 SCC OnLine Mad 957, decided on 24-04-2024]


1. W.P.(MD)No.6635 of 2019

One comment

  • It is un justified and no justice in it. Employee having rights to claim his when came in to his knowledge that he was paid under wages . He shall not be deprived from it when terming the employer and employee relation ends. In the definition of Administrative tribunal rules retired person also servant till his grievance settled.

Join the discussion

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *