Back
THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
DEVASHIS BARUAH
On The Death of Bijan Lal Choudhury, His Wife, Rekha Choudhury Wife of Late Bijan Lal Choudhury – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.)
Heard Ms. G. Goswami, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. T.J. Mahanta, the learned Senior Standing Counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No. 2 and Mr. C. Baruah, the learned Standing Counsel appears on behalf of the respondent Nos. 3 and 6.
2. None appears on behalf of the Finance Department of the Government of Assam when the matter is called. In addition to that, the learned counsel for respondent Nos. 4 and 5 is also not present when the matter is called.
3. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the communication dated 02.07.2018 issued by respondent No. 6 to the Register General of the Gauhati High Court whereby it has been stated that the pay in respect to the petitioner was wrongly fixed at Rs.6,850/- instead of Rs.6,600/- on 01.01.1996 by allowing 2(two) increments as weightage for fixation of pay on revise scale instead of admissible 1 (one) increment as weightage since his pay scale was Rs.5,375-10,700/- (the maximum pay of the scale is more than Rs.9,725/- as such 1(one) increment as weightage is admissible at the time of fixation of pay on 01.01.1996) and on
Recovery of excess salary payments from retired employees is impermissible, especially when they had no role in the erroneous fixation, as established by the Supreme Court.
Recovery of excess salary can be enforced against an employee if they knowingly received double benefits under different pay structures, despite it being a result of erroneous pay fixation.
Recovery of excess salary from retired employees is impermissible, particularly when payments were made with knowledge of their inappropriateness and detecting excess payments after a prolonged perio....
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.
The court ruled that recoveries from Group-C employees nearing retirement are impermissible, reaffirming protections established in Rafiq Masih.
Recoveries from retired employees based on erroneous salary payments are impermissible, emphasizing equitable treatment and judicial discretion in enforcing employee rights.
Recovery of excess salary payments from retired employees is impermissible unless specific conditions are met, as established in Rafiq Masih.
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
