Recovery of excess payment without fault of the recipient, after superannuation, is impermissible in law.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. Kripanand Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Tej Bahadur Singh, learned senior counsel, duly assisted by Mr. Nagendra Kumar Singh, for the Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University and Mr. Madhaw Prasad Yadav, learned GP-23 for the State.

2. The present writ application has been filed for the following reliefs :

“(i) For issuance of an appropriate direction, order or writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay the entire retiral dues of the petitioner i.e. Earned leave, pension, provident fund, gratuity, differences of salary in 7th pay scale etc. admissible to her husband along with interest @ 10% over the entire due amount from the date it is due till the date of its actual payment.

(ii) For holding and declaring that the similar benefits allowed and paid to a similarly situated employees cannot be withheld to other employees, similarly situated, and thus the respondents are under bounden duty to pay the same to this petitioner immediately and forthwith in view of the mandate of Bihar State Litigation Policy.

(iii) For any other relief/reliefs to which the petitioner may be found entitled to, in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

3. Short facts, which led to the filing of the present writ application is that the husband of the petitioner was duly appointed in the College on 03.02.1977 by the Managing Committee of Sarvjit Sanskrit Upshastri Mahavidylaya, which is affiliated college under the Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Darbhanga (hereinafter referred to as ‘the University’) against the vacant and sanctioned post approved by the Registrar of the University vide Memo No. 2205 dated 22.09.1981 w.e.f. 01.01.1980. After serving for almost four decades, the husband of the petitioner superannuated from service on 31.01.2019, as a teacher.

4. It is contended that in the year 2016, a notification was issued vide Memo No. 311 dated 07.02.2016 (Annexure-3) by the Registrar of the University that the Triple Benefit Scheme has also been implemented for the deficit affiliated College w.e.f. 31.08.2010 and the copies whereof was communicated to all the concerned. The scheme of Triple Benefit was not allowed to the petitioner’s husband and unfortunately he died on 12.06.2019 without getting the said benefit. Despite running from pillar to post, when the petitioner has not been allowed the death-cum-retiral benefit of her late husband, she approached before this Court by filing the present writ application.

5. Before coming to the subsequent development, it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the salary of the petitioner’s husband was revised from time to time along with other employees of the respondent University by the Pay Fixation Committee, duly constituted by the University itself and at no point of time any irregularity was ever pointed out by any of the authority and the petitioner’s husband was paid accordingly, till the date of his retirement.

6. During the pendency of the writ application, the Government of Bihar came out with a letter, as contained in Memo No. 11 dated 21.05.2021, directing all the concerned that the amount of regular pension will be paid only after verification of salary by the Pay Verification Cell and on the basis whereof it has been found that an excess amount of Rs.6,93,188/- has been wrongly calculated and sanctioned in favour of the petitioner, as such, the Registrar of the University issued an Office Order as contained in Memo No.985 dated 22.08.2022 (Annexure-B to the counter affidavit) and deducted the aforesaid amount of Rs.6,93,188/- from the pension and gratuity of the petitioner’s husband.

7. The petitioner being aggrieved, assailed the aforesaid order of deduction by filing an interlocutory application and submits that the pay scale of the petitioner’s husband was fixed by the Pay Fixation Committee, duly constituted by the University time to time and having been found no irregularity, he was allowed to s