THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
BUDI HABUNG, J.
Jahindra Brahma, S/o Late Dandaram Brahma – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Assam Through The Additional Chief Secretary To The Government Of Assam, Environment And Forest Department And Ors. - Respondents
WP(C)/3144 of 2023
Decided On : 30-04-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual history regarding retirement and disputed gratuity recovery. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. parties' conflicting contentions regarding recovery of erroneous government overpayments. (Para 7 , 8 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. unauthorized recoveries from retirees without fraud are impermissible and inequitable. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. mandate for refund of recovered gratuity with specified enforcement timelines. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT :
BUDI HABUNG, J.
Heard Mr. A. K. Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. R. Gogoi, learned Standing Counsel, Forest for the respondent Nos. 1 & 4; Mr. A. Baruah, learned Standing Counsel, AG for the respondent No. 3; and Mr. A. Chaliha, learned Standing Counsel, Finance for the respondent No.6.
2. The present writ petition raises a short but important question regarding the legality of recovery of alleged excess payment of gratuity from the pensionary benefits of a retired employee.
3. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner was appointed as Forest Range Officer on 02.05.1976. He retired from the service on 30.10.2011 as Assistant Conservator of Forests (ACF).
4. Initially, by an order dated 11.07.2019, the petitioner was paid DCRG amounting to Rs. 6,76,253/- (Rupees six lakhs seventy-six thousand two hundred fifty-three only). Thereafter, by an order dated 28.09.2020, the pension of the petitioner was revised. Upon revision, a further amount of Rs. 1,54,341/- (Rupees one lakh fifty-four thousand three hundred forty-one only) was released to the petitioner, making the total gratuity amount of the petitioner to Rs. 8,30,594/- (Rupees eight lakhs thirty thousand five hundred ninety-four only).
5. Since the benefits entitled to him was denied, he filed writ petition being WP(C) No. 1511/2020 seeking direction for promotional and financial benefits, consequential arrears, and re-fixation of pension amounts. During pendency of WP(C) No. 1511/2020, the petitioner was retrospectively promoted to the rank of Deputy Conservator of Forests (DCF) w.e.f. 26.11.2010 by order dated 17.08.2022. Subsequently, pursuant to direction of this Court dated 24.08.2022, passed in WP(C) No. 1511/2020, the respondent authorities had worked out and recalculated the pensionary benefits and released the dues.
6. However, by impugned order dated 26.12.2022, the respondent No. 3 directed recovery of Rs. 1,30,594/- (Rupees one lakh thirty thousand five hundred ninety-four only) from the petitioner on the ground of “excess payment” of gratuity, to be adjusted from pensionary benefits. The said order being relevant is reproduced as follows:
“O.O the Principal Accountant General(A& F)Assam, Maidamgaon, Beltola, Guwahati-781029
| No. PR-6/Seq No.8051/A-055180/Rev/R2/2022 | dated 14/12/2022 |
To,
The Treasury Officer
Bongaigaon, PIN- 783380
Sub: Payment of Revised Pension etc. in respect of Shri Jahindra Brahma Retd. Assistant Conservator of Forest holder of PPO No.902611256713.
Sir,
Consequent upon revision pension case in terms of OM No.PPG(P) 88/2010/27 dated 01/06/2010, the pensionery benefits of SHRI JAHINDRA BRAHMA RETD. ASSISTANT CONSERVATOR OF FOREST has been revised as follows :-
I) Pension @ Rs. 43080/- (Rupees forty three thousand eighty only) p.m w.e.f. 01/11/2011 onwards.
II) Reduced payment @ Rs. /- (Rupees only) p.m. from the date of commutation or w.e.f. 01.11.2011 whichever is later till the date of restoration of pension due to commutation of Rs./- (Rupees only) only p.m.
III) In the event of death of pensioner Enhanced Family Pension @ Rs./-(Rupees only) only p.m. from the date following the date of death of the pensioner for the period of 7 (seven) or upto 08.10.2016 whichever period is less and thereafter Normal Family Pension @ of Rs 25870/- (Rupees Twenty five Thousand eight hundred seventy only ) till her/his death or whichever is earlier.
IV) Gratuity of Rs. 700000/- (Rupees seven lakhs only) in lump less already drawn Rs. 830594/- (Rupees Eight lakhs thirty th
Recovery of excess payments from employees is impermissible when no fault or misrepresentation is established on their part.
Withholding gratuity post-retirement without notice or opportunity to contest alleged incorrect pay fixation is impermissible and deemed harsh.
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.
Recovery of excess payments from retired employees is impermissible without adherence to natural justice, especially when payments were made for an extended period without notice.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.