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.

JUDGMENT :

(DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.)

Heard Mr. P.D. Nair, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. T.R. Gogoi, the learned Government Advocate who appears on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1, 3 and 6; Mr. H.K. Das, the learned Standing Counsel who appears on behalf of the respondent Nos. 2, 4 and 8; Mr. R. Borpujari, the learned Standing Counsel who appears on behalf of the respondent No. 5 and Mr. R.K. Talukdar, the learned Standing Counsel who appears on behalf of the respondent No. 7.

2. The issue involved in the instant proceedings is, as to whether, the action on the part of the Respondent Authorities to take steps for recovery of an amount of Rs. 10,72,086/- from the salary of the petitioner on the basis of a communication dated 01.08.2014 and another communication dated 27.10.2014 are in accordance with law. The petitioner herein also assails an order dated 12.12.2014 issued by the Registrar General of the Gauhati High Court whereby the representation of the petitioner dated 06.08.2014 was rejected. The petitioner further by way of the instant writ petition has sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus that the petitioner is entitled to fixation of his salary, as on the date of his appointment at Rs. 27,900/-, on the basis of the administrative order dated 15.05.2023.

3. For the purpose of deciding the entitlements of the petitioner and further, as to whether, there should be a recovery as against the petitioner, it is relevant to take note of the brief facts which led to the filing of the instant writ petition.

4. The petitioner herein was selected in the Stenographer Grade-D Recruitment conducted in the year 1989 and was appointed in the Central Bureau of Investigation as a Stenographer Grade- D/Senior Clerk Steno on 28.06.1990 in the pay scale of Rs. 1200-40-1640-60- 2040/-. Upon completion of 12 (twelve) years of service, the petitioner was granted the higher scale of pay under the Assured Carrier Progression Scheme of the Government of India, fixing his pay at Rs. 5,500/- in the scale of pay of Rs. 5500-175-9000/- w.e.f. June, 2002.

5. An advertisement was issued by the Gauhati High Court on 23.05.2008 for filling up of temporary vacant posts of Stenographer Grade-I in the Principal Seat of the Gauhati High Court in the scale of pay of Rs. 5725-175-6600-250-7350-EB-250-8100-325-11025-400- 11825/- per month plus other allowances as admissible in terms of the Rules. The petitioner applied pursuant to the said advertisement along with others and was selected. A Notification in that regard was issued on 26.12.2008. The petitioner resigned from the post of Stenographer-D/ Senior Clerk Steno at Central Bureau of Investigation and thereupon, joined the Gauhati High Court on 09.01.2009. At the time of joining, the petitioner submitted the last pay certificate dated 19.01.2009 showing that the petitioner was enjoying a pay in the pay band of Rs. 12,660/- with Grade Pay of Rs. 4,200/-.

6. Subsequent thereto, the records reveal that the Joint Registrar (Administration) of the Gauhati High Court had put up a note to the effect that the petitioner was drawing an amount of Rs. 16,860/- in the scale of pay of Rs. 9300-34,800/- plus Grade Pay of Rs. 4,300/-, but the petitioner having been appointed to a post wherein the maximum scale of pay was Rs. 11,825/-, the initial basic pay was fixed at Rs. 11,825/-.

7. At this stage, it is very relevant to take note of that