Mohit Kumar Shah, J.—The present writ petition has been filed for restraining the respondent authorities from making any recovery from the amount of family pension, being paid to the widow-petitioner and for setting aside the decision of the respondent authorities to recover a sum of Rs. 3,43,792/- from the monthly family pension of the petitioner as also to direct the respondent authorities to refund the amount, which has already been recovered from the family pension of the petitioner. Lastly, it is prayed to revise the family pension of the petitioner on the basis of 7th Pay Commission Report.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the deceased husband of the petitioner, namely, late Rameshwar Singh, retired on 30.6.1982 while working as Road Mazdoor in Public Works Department, Saran at Chapra, whereafter pension was being paid to him with effect from 01.07.1982 regularly, however, he died on 09.01.1988.

3. It is the further case of the petitioner that she was drawing her family pension from the State Bank of India, Marhowrah Branch, however, suddenly, she received a notice dated 04.02.2019, intimating her that a sum of Rs. 3,43,792/- has been paid in excess to her, hence, the same be returned to the Respondent-State Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as “the Bank”). Thereafter, the monthly family pension being paid to the petitioner at the rate of 15,445/- was abruptly reduced to a sum of Rs. 7,196/- with effect from the month of December, 2018 and at the moment, a sum of Rs. 7,916/- is being credited in the account of the petitioner. It is also submitted that the petitioner is an illiterate widow lady and she has no knowledge as to how the pension / family pension was fixed and as to under what circumstances, recovery is being made. However, it is submitted that no recovery can be made from a retired person, especially from a widow in case there is no misrepresentation on the part of the pensioner. In this connection, reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner on a judgment dated 01.07.2019, rendered by this Court, in the case of Akhileshwari Devi vs. The Union of India & Ors. (CWJC No. 4156 of 2018)*, as upheld by the learned Division Bench of this Court, by a judgment dated 19.07.2022, passed in L.P.A. No. 270 of 2021. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon a judgment, rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court ,in the case of Thomas Daniel vs. State of Kerala & Ors., reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 536, as also the one rendered by this Court, vide judgment dated 09.07.2019, passed in CWJC No. 4050 of 2019 (Kalawati Devi vs. The Union of India & Ors.)**.

4. Per contra, the learned Senior Counsel for the Respondent- Bank has submitted that the deceased husband of the petitioner had opted to avail banking services of the Respondent-Bank to receive his due pension from his employer i.e. the Government of Bihar by opening an account with the Respondent-Bank and upon death of the husband of the petitioner, the petitioner also opted for availing the banking services of the Respondent- Bank to receive her due family pension in the account in question and she had also executed an undertaking by putting her thumb impression whereby she had undertaken to refund / make good to the Bank any amount to which she is found to be not entitled or any excess amount which may have been credited to her account as also had agreed that such amount when demanded by the Bank, as due and payable to the Bank, shall be conclusive / binding and refundable by her.

5. It is the case of the Respondent-Bank that on account of clerical mistake on the part of the Bank, the nature of pension was uploaded in the system as regular pension in place of family pension, the date of birth of the petitioner was wrongly fed in the system of the Bank as 02.03.1922 and even after revision of pension under the 6th CPC, the old age benefit was also being credited as per the date of birth fed in the pension portal on the basis of en