Back
RAVI NATH TILHARI, NYAPATHY VIJAY
Union of India – Appellant
Versus
Vendra Satyanarayana – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAVI NATH TILHARI, J.
1. Heard Sri Sridhar Tummalapudi, learned Central Government counsel for the petitioners.
2. There is no representation for the respondent Nos. 1 to 19.
3. This Writ Petition under article 226 of the constitution of India was filed by the petitioners challenging the order of Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, (in short "Tribunal") in O.A.No.348 of 2012 passed on 02.08.2012.
4. The O.A. was filed by the applicants/respondent Nos. 1 to 19. They had challenged and prayed to set aside the recovery ordered by the 4th respondent therein/4th petitioner herein/Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Bhimavaram Division, on the ground of alleged excess amount paid to the applicants earlier, calculating the Time Related Continuity Allowance (TRCA) on the basis of cycle beat, commencing the recovery from the month of August 2011 @ Rs.1,000/-(Rupees One Thousand only) uniformly from all the applicants which also resulted in reduction of pay of the applicants (TRCA) with retrospective effect from 01.03.1998. They further prayed for direction not to reduce their pay and not to make consequential recoveries as also to refund the amounts already recovered from t
Excess payments made to employees without fault or misrepresentation cannot be recovered, especially after significant time has elapsed.
Excess payments made due to erroneous salary fixation cannot be recovered from an employee if based on mistake without fraud; recovery post-retirement within a year is inequitable.
Recovery of excess payments from employees is prohibited if it causes undue hardship, especially for lower-ranked workers or retirees, reaffirming rights under Article 14.
Point of Law : Relief against recovery is granted by courts not because of any right in the employees, but in equity, exercising judicial discretion to relieve the employees from the hardship that wi....
Recoveries from retired employees based on erroneous salary payments are impermissible, emphasizing equitable treatment and judicial discretion in enforcing employee rights.
Recovery of excess payments from employees without their fault violates principles of equity and fairness, especially when recovery occurs post-retirement and after a significant period.
Recovery of excess payments from Group-C employees beyond five years is impermissible, emphasizing equitable treatment and adherence to Supreme Court guidelines.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
