Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PATNA
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, J.
Madan Prasad Singh — Appellant
Versus
The State Of Bihar And Others - Respondent
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 12040 of 2019
Decided on : 13-01-2021
Service Law – Gratuity – Petition for payment of entire gratuity amount without recovering excess salary payment amount which was paid by order of competent authority of department – In these office orders there is no stipulation that any payment made to petitioner by virtue of fixation of his pay under these office orders/letters if any excess amount is paid to him, same may recovered – There is also no stipulation in office orders that if benefits being allowed to petitioner are found to have been wrongly fixed, same may be recovered – No undertaking was taken from petitioner – Withdrawal of benefit stands nullified by virtue of Judgment of coordinate Bench of this Court and now in view of recommendation of Seventh Pay Commission and acceptance of recommendation by Cabinet post of Accounts Clerk, Bhandarpal, Correspondence Clerk as also Lower Division Clerk and Upper Division Clerk are in same cadre of General Clerk and they will be known as Lower Division Clerk/Upper Division Clerk – State respondents directed to pay entire gratuity with statutory interest thereon from the date 30 days after gratuity became due to petitioner till the date of payment without any deduction/recovery of alleged excess salary payment. (Paras 19, 30 and 38)
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner in the present case is seeking following reliefs:
(ii) For providing cost and compensation if any for not complying the directions passed in the Order dated 27.02.2019 in CWJC No. 13644 of 2016 for treating equal the petitioner as Correspondence Clerk with Accounts Clerk appointed in between 01.05.1980 to 27.09.1999."
2. During pendency of the writ application an Interlocutory Application being LA. No. 01 of 2020 has been filed for adding two more reliefs and the LA. has been allowed vide order dated 25.09.2020 to be part and parcel of the writ application. The reliefs prayed therein are as under:-
(Vide Annexure -1 of this petition).
(IV) For quashing the Finance Department Circular No. 8059 dated 14.09.15 by which modified pay scale of Bhandarpal/Correspondence Clerk working under Work Departments, as provided under earlier Finance Dept. Circular No. 6338 dated 16.07.15, was withdrawn with effect from 16.07.15 and further directed to deduct the amount paid under modified/revised pay scale if any from them.
(Vide Annexure -8 of writ application, which is also attached herewith as Annexure - 2 to this petition)."
3. It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as a Correspondence Clerk on 20.03.1980 in the Irrigation Department, Government of Bihar. While he was still in service the Department of Finance, Government of Bihar came out with a Circular contained in Memo No. 3111 dated 25.03.2015 (Annexure 1' to the writ application). By this Circular a decision was taken that the employees appointed in the cadre of Accounts Clerk in between 01.05.1980 to 27.09.1999 will be known by a common post known as Sr. Accounts Clerk and those Accounts Clerk are entitled to get pay scale of Rs. 730-1080/- with effect from 01.04.1981; Pay Scale of Rs. 1400-2300/- with effect from 01.01.1986 and Pay Scale of Rs. 4500-7000/- with effect from 01.01.1996 and then after 01.01.2006 PB+2800/- will be applicable. Paragraph 5' of the said Circular on which reliance has been placed on behalf of the petitioner is quoted hereunder for purpose of consideration:-
¼1½ fnukad 01@05@1980 ls fnukad 27@09@1999 dh frfFk rd bl laoxZ esa fu;qDrdehZ ,dhd`r inuke& ^^ojh; ys[kk fyfid^^ ls vfHkfgr gksaxs A ,sls ys[kk fyfid dks fnukad 01@04@1981 ds izHkko ls :0 730&1080@&] fnukad 01@01@1986 ds izHkko ls :0 1400&2300@ fnukad 01@01@1996 ds izHkko ls :0 4500&7000@ rFkk fnukad
01@01@2006 ds izHkko ls ih- ch-&1 + 2800@vuqekU; gksxkA
¼2½ fnukad 28@09@1999 ,oa mlds ckn dh frfFk;ksa esa dk;Z foHkkxksa ds ys[kk fyfid laoxZ esa duh; ys[kk fyfid@fuEuoxhZ; ys[kk fyfid@fuEuoxhZ; fyfid ¼ys[kk½ ds in ij fu;qDr dehZ duh; ys[kk fyfid ds inuke ls vfHkfgr gksaxs rFkk mUgsa fnukad 31@12@2005 rd :0 4000&6000@& rFkk fnukad 01@01@2006 ls ih-ch- 1 + 2400@& dk osrueku vuqekU; gksxk A ojh; ys[kk fyfid dksfV esa izksUufr ds ckn mudk osrueku 4500&7000 rFkk fnukad 01-01-2006 ds ckn ih- ch- 1+2800 :- vuqekU; gksxk A^^
4. It is further case of the petitioner that vide Memo No. 6338 dated 16.07.2015 the Additional Secretary, Government of Bihar issued another circular by which considering the nature of work and responsibility of the
Recovery of excess payments from Class-III employees is impermissible without misrepresentation, emphasizing the employer's responsibility for errors.
Withholding gratuity post-retirement without notice or opportunity to contest alleged incorrect pay fixation is impermissible and deemed harsh.
Recovery of excess payments from Group-C employees beyond five years is impermissible, emphasizing equitable treatment and adherence to Supreme Court guidelines.
Recovery of excess payments from retired employees is impermissible if it causes undue hardship, necessitating prior notice and opportunity for response before recovery.
Recovery from retired employees is impermissible when excess payments were made without misrepresentation, as per established legal precedents.
Recovery of excess payments from Group-C employees is impermissible after five years, ensuring equitable treatment in employment matters.
Recovery of excess payments from employees is impermissible when no fault or misrepresentation is established on their part.
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
