Walsh v Minister for Local Government and Public Health

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 21 December 1929
• Date: 21 December 1929
• Court: Supreme Court (Irish Free State)

[H. C., S. C., I.F.S.]

Walsh

and

Minister for Local Government and Public Health

Jurisdiction - Surcharge -Validity - Previous audit - Appeal to Minister for Local Government - Minister's order of confirmation -Whether surcharge incorporated - Finality of order - Certiorari - Local Government (Ir.) Act, 1871 (34 35 Vict. c. 109), ss. 12 and13 - Local Government (Ir.) Act, 1872 (35 36 Vict. c. 69), s. 6 - Local Government (Ir.) Act, 1898 (61 62 Vict. c. 37), s. 63 - Local Government (Ir.) Act, 1902 (2 Ed. 7, c. 38), s. 20.

A Clerk of a rural district council received, during the period from 1st March, 1920, to 30th September, 1925, a bonus in addition to his salary, and this bonus, he contended, had been duly granted to him. During that period the payments made to him were entered in the expenditure book and submitted to various inspectors of the Local Government Department, who passed them as correct, and such payments up to October, 1924, were audited by auditors of the said Department and certified as correct. In November, 1925, B., an auditor of the said Department, commenced his audit of the Council's accounts for the two half-years ending respectively 31st March and 30th September, 1925. He informed the Clerk that the legality of the payment of the bonus had been questioned in the Ministry of Local Government by reason of the Clerk's claim for superannuation, which he had previously lodged on the abolition of his office, and that the matter would have to remain open. A local inquiry into the matter was then held, at which the Clerk gave evidence. Subsequently B., by his certificate, charged against the clerk a certain sum in respect of the period from 1st October, 1924, to 30th September, 1925, and a further sum in respect of the period from 1st January, 1920, to 30th September, 1924, and certified the same to be due from the Clerk, stating his reasons to be that he found as a fact that the Clerk was guilty of misconduct by wilfully inducing the Council to authorise periodic overpayments of salary to him during the whole period from 1st January, 1920, to 30th September, 1925, and for that purpose wilfully and continually misrepresented the correct amount due to him on foot of his salary; that the said sum represented...