WA No. 1835 of 2026 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 13-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR WA No. 1835 of 2026 AND CMP NO. 16624 OF 2026 1. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Additional Chief Secretary to the Government, Home (Police) Department, Fort St.George, Chennai – 009. 2. The Director General of Police (L and O) (Head of Police Force), Office of the Director General of Police, Mylapore, Chennai - 004. 3. The Commissioner of Police Vepery, Chennai. 4. The Deputy Commissioner of Police Headquarters, Greater Chennai Police, Chennai. 5. The Joint Commissioner of Police Traffic Zone ( South), Chennai. ..Appellants Vs A. Vijayakumar S/o. Late Aharone, Sub Inspector of Police (Retired), S.I. No.10367, M-3/17, New A.R. Police Quarters, Pudhupettai, Chennai District - 002. ..Respondent https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WA No. 1835 of 2026 __________ Page2 of 4 Prayer : Writ Appeal under Clause XV of the Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 06.10.2025 made in WP No.36175 of 2024. For Appellants : Dr.R.Gouri, Government Counsel For Respondent : Mr.V.Lakshmi Narayanan Judgment (Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.Subramaniam J.) State preferred the present writ appeal challenging the order dated 06.10.2025 made in W.P.No.36175 of 2024, wherein the order of pay fixation and recovery came to be challenged by the respondent employee. 2. The writ Court, applying the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in State of Punjab -vs- Rafiq Masih ((2014) 8 SCC 883 held that recovery of excess pay made is impermissible after a prolonged period. In the present case, the respondent retired as Sub Inspector of Police on 30.09.2019 on attaining his age of superannuation. That apart, no misrepresentation on the part of the respondent was established in the matter of refixation of pay, nor the respondent has given any undertaking to recover the excess amount by the department. In those circumstances, the writ Court held that the recovery of excess pay after a prolonged period is impermissible. The said proposition has already been settled by the Supreme Court. Therefore, there is no infirmity in the order passed by the writ Court. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WA No. 1835 of 2026 __________ Page3 of 4 3. However, regarding refixation of pay, the department is bound to fix the pay in accordance with the Pay Rules and the Government Orders in force. In this regard, if any representation is submitted by the respondent, that may be considered and the authority is bound to refix the pay in accordance with the Pay Rules as applicable to the post and with reference to his service records. 4. With the above observations, the writ appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (S.M.S.,J.) (N.S.,J.) 13-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No KST https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WA No. 1835 of 2026 __________ Page4 of 4 S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J. AND N.SENTHILKUMAR J. KST WA No. 1835 of 2026 AND CMP NO. 16624 OF 2026 13-07-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis