Harish Kumar, J. – Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Samir Kumar, AC to SC-16.

2. This order is confined only to the petitioner no.2, as in view of order dated 18.08.2022, passed by this Court, the name of petitioner no.1 (Umesh Prasad Singh) has been deleted from the array of parties.

3. The present writ application has been filed seeking quashing of the Bill showing the excess payment of Rs.7,08,718/- dated 18.06.2022, issued under the signature of the Head Master, Middle School, Khizersarai-cum-Drawing and Disbursing Officer, whereby the alleged aforesaid excess amount has been deducted from the amount of gratuity of the petitioner. The petitioner seeks further direction upon the respondents to refund the amount, which has been deducted from the head of gratuity and further directed to refix the pension of the petitioner on the basis of his last pay drawn, as the petitioner superannuated from the post of Assistant Teacher in the pay scale of Rs.72,100/-.

4. The short facts of the case is that the petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in the year 1991 and was posted in Primary School, Rajbigha under Atri Block in the district of Gaya. In the year 2003, the petitioner was granted Selection Grade Scale in the Pay Scale of Rs.5000-8000/- and thereafter he was also granted promotion to the post of Graduate Trained Teacher on 13.12.2012 fixing his salary after giving one increment as per the Bihar Taken Over Elementary School Teachers’ Promotion Rule, 1993.

5. It is the case of the petitioner that the fixation of the salary of the petitioner, on account of Selection Grade and Graduate Trained Scale, was approved by the Finance Department i.e. District Accounts Officer, Gaya as well as the other respondent authority and since then the petitioner was getting salary regularly and after serving more than 30 years of satisfactory service, he superannuated from the post of Assistant Teacher (Graduate Trained Scale) on 31.01.2022 from Girls Middle School, Uchauli, Khizersarai, Gaya in the pay scale of of Rs.72,100/- (P.B. + G.P.). He further contended that the pension of the petitioner has been fixed vide letter dated 13.05.2022, issued from the office of Accountant General, Bihar, Patna @ Rs.33,000/- after deducting three increments at the pay scale of Rs.66,000/- whereas it should be fixed at Rs.36,050/- on the basis of last pay drawn Rs.72,100/-. He next submitted that the gratuity amount of Rs.13,48,710/- was also sanctioned by the Accountant General, Bihar, Patna. However, Rs.7,08,718/- has been deducted arbitrarily from the aforesaid amount on the pretext of wrong fixation.

6. While concluding his submission, he vehemently submits that recovery of alleged excess paid amount from the gratuity after retirement of the employee is more disadvantageous position when compared to in service employees. Any attempt to recover excess paid amount would cause undue hardship to the employees. Moreover, the petitioner has never been found guilty of any misrepresentation or fraud in the matter of fixation of his pay scale, which was duly fixed by the respondents after verification of the entire service record. He lastly submits that there is complete violation of principles of natural justice, as neither any notice was served to him nor any opportunity of hearing has been provided before deduction of alleged excess paid amount of Rs.7,08,718/- from the gratuity.

7. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no.5 and submissions have been made on behalf of the learned counsel for the State that on account of erroneous fixation of pay at the time of promotion of the petitioner in the Graduate Trained Scale, excess payment has been made to the petitioner, as the pay fixation award was not admissible to the petitioner in senior/selection scale. He further contended that the Accountant General, Bihar, Patna vide letter dated 01.12.2019 has directed the District Programme Officer (Establishment), Ga