Back
VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI
Balvantbhai Dhanubhai Bhuriya – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Vaibhavi D. Nanavati, J.
1. Heard Mr. Samir B. Gohil, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and Ms. Pooja Ashar, learned advocate appearing for the respondent nos. 1 and 2.
2.1. Briefly stated that, the petitioner was appointed as Librarian on 20.02.1990 and was serving at Dudhiya High School, Limkheda since 1990.
2.2. The petitioner was granted 1st higher pay scale of Rs.5000-8000, w.e.f. 20.02.1999 and became entitled for the 2nd higher pay scale, upon completion of 15 years of service, from the date of 1st higher pay scale, in accordance with the government resolution dated 02.07.2007. Accordingly, the school sent proposal to the respondent no.2 for 2nd higher pay scale. The respondent no.2 returned the said proposal with objection to the school vide letter dated 07.11.2016. By letter dated 05.10.2016, the respondent no.3 asked the respondent no.2 to initiate the recovery from the petitioner of excess payment, on the ground that the 1st higher pay scale of Rs.5000-8000 was wrongly granted to the petitioner. The said communication is duly produced at Annexure-C.
2.3. The aforesaid recovery from the petitioner of excess payment, which was granted on 20.02.1999, was e
Recovery of excess payments from Class-III employees is impermissible without evidence of fraud or misrepresentation, emphasizing adherence to natural justice principles.
Recovery of excess payment from employees must adhere to principles of natural justice and cannot be made after an unreasonable delay, especially for Class-3 employees.
Recovery of excess payments from employees is impermissible if there is no misrepresentation or suppression of facts, especially when nearing retirement.
Recovery of excess payments from Class-III employees is impermissible without misrepresentation, emphasizing the employer's responsibility for errors.
Recovery of excess payments made to employees is impermissible where no fault exists on the employee's part and payments have spanned over five years, protecting livelihood rights.
Recovery of excess payments from employees without their fault violates principles of equity and fairness, especially when recovery occurs post-retirement and after a significant period.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that no recovery can be made from an employee if the excess payment was not due to any fault on the employee's part, as determined by various legal....
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
