Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
JYOTI SINGH
Vinod Sehgal – Appellant
Versus
Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks writ for quashing and refund. (Para 1) |
| 2. reduction of penalty and subsequent pay fixation. (Para 2 , 3 , 5) |
| 3. incorrect pay fixation post-retirement. (Para 4 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. arguments on correct pay fixation methodology. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 5. court considers argument for proper application of law. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 6. law dictates pay restoration after penalty. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 7. court's criticism of respondent’s actions. (Para 17 , 18) |
| 8. court's decision to quash arbitrary order. (Para 19 , 20) |
| 9. final directions and costs imposed. (Para 21 , 22 , 23) |
JUDGMENT
Jyoti Singh, J. (ORAL)
1. Present writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner seeking quashing of the impugned Office Order dated 19.12.2018 as well as issuance of writ of mandamus to the Respondent to refund the payment wrongly deducted from the retirement benefits with interest @ 12% per annum. Writ of mandamus is also sought for re-fixation of his pension on the basis of pay drawn on 30.11.2018, in terms of Order dated 28.01.2016.
2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the factual score of the case, to the extent relevant to decide the issue arising in the writ petition, is that Petitioner
The court established that the increments earned during a penalty period must be restored upon its expiry when the penalty order specifies no postponement of future increments.
Pension fixed on higher pay scale granted by competent authority and continued for decades cannot be reduced retrospectively after retirement due to delay, absence of notice, and violation of natural....
No recovery from retiral dues of employees permissible; speaking orders mandatory for pay refixation.
Retrospective pay refixation to enforce non-cumulative punishments permissible; recovery of excess from retiral benefits upheld absent fraud.
Point of Law : Retirement of service - If any mistake committed by the department in making pay fixation of an employee is rectified after the retirement of an employee withdrawing the benefit which ....
The court upheld the authority's reduction of the petitioner's pay due to prior erroneous fixation, confirming compliance with the Central Civil Services Rules while quashing the recovery order.
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
