Point of law: Pension – Recovery of excess amount paid - The substantive right of the petitioners/Bank to recover the money paid in excess to the original applicant in ways other than judicial remedy is not destroyed by reason of the rules of limitation.

JUDGMENT :

K.Babu, J.

The order dated 5.9.2019 in O.A.No.122 of 2019, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench, is under challenge in this Original Petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Respondents 3 and 4 in the O.A., the State Bank of India, Centralised Pension Processing Centre, Thiruvananthapuram and its Branch Manager of Kadavoor Branch respectively are the petitioners. The original applicant and respondents 1 and 2 in the O.A. are the respondents herein.

2. The prayers in the Original Petition are as follows :

“To issue appropriate order or direction setting aside Exhibit P4 order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam dated 5.9.2019 in O.A.No.180/00122/2019 to the extent it limits the right of the Bank to recover the excess payment made to the applicant three years prior to the date when the Bank had informed the applicant i.e., 8.2.2019 and to declare that the Bank is entitled to recover the amount paid in excess during the period November 2013 to January 2016.”

3. Heard Smt.Bindumol Joseph, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Sri.A.Dinesh Rao, the learned Standing Counsel for Railways and Sri.C.S.Gopalakrishnan Nair, learned counsel for the original applicant.

4. The original applicant is the wife of late K.Sathyaseelan, who retired as headwaiter in the pantry car from Thiruvananthapuram Division of Southern Railway on 30.11.2006. Sathyaseelan died on 12.7.2007. The original applicant has been receiving family pension. She received letter No.CPPC/TVM dated 8.2.2019 issued by petitioner No.2/respondent No.4 in the O.A. informing that an amount of Rs.1,49,366/-was paid to her in excess from November, 2013 to January, 2019. She was further informed that the excess amount so paid will be recovered in instalments at the rate of Rs.3,200/-per month from 1.2.2019 till 31.12.2022. She was also informed that the family pension entitled to her has been reset at Rs.9,000/-with effect from 1.1.2016. The original applicant pleaded that no amount is recoverable from her. The applicant contended that recovery cannot be effected for the period from November 2013 to January 2016, a period prior to the span of three years from the date of notice of recovery, as it is barred by limitation.

5. The original applicant/respondent No.1 raising the above challenges, inter alia, filed the aforementioned O.A. with the following prayers :

“(i) To call for the records leading upto the issue of Annexure A2 and quash the same.

(ii) To declare that no amount is to be recovered from the applicant towards the alleged excess payment.

(iii) To direct the 4th and 5th respondents not to effect any recovery from the family pension on the ground of alleged excess

payment.

(iv) To direct the respondents to credit the arrears of pension etc., as ordered in Annexure A3 within a time frame.

(v) Grant such other relief or reliefs that may be prayed for or that are found to be just and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case.

(vi) Grant costs of this O.A.”

6. The petitioners/respondents 3 and 4 in the O.A. resisted the claim of the original applicant and contended that the challenge of the original applicant raising the plea of limitation is not tenable as the matter falls within the ambit of Section 17 of the Limitation Act. The pensioner died on 12.7.2007 and the family pension at the enhanced rate was sanctioned to the applicant till 29.11.2013. According to the petitioners, enhanced rate of family pension was to be paid till the deceased pensioner would have reached the age of 67 years or 7 years from the date of his death whichever is earlier. The pensioner would have reached 67 years on 29.11.2013 and his date of birth is 30.11.1946. Inadvertently, the Bank continued to pay enhanced rate of pension up to January, 2019. The mistake was found during verification conducted in the month of January, 2019. The total excess payment made to the original applicant is Rs.1,49,366/-. The original appli