Back
1983 Supreme(Raj) 307
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
D.L.Mehta, J.
Akbar Khan and ors. - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan And Ors. - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 72, 73, 148 and 149 of 1981.
Decided On : 16-03-1983
The principle of audi alteram partem is applicable even in administrative matters and a person has a vested right to the emoluments of the post on which he has worked.
Headnote:
SERVICE LAW - RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKE - PRINCIPLE OF AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM - APPLICABILITY - RIGHT TO BE HEARD - VESTED RIGHT - ESTOPPEL - RECOVERY OF EXCESS PAYMENT - PROHIBITION.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners were appointed as Civil Mistries and were paid the salary and perks of that post. However, the State Government later realized that it was a mistake and issued orders to recover the excess payment from the petitioners.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the petitioners had a vested right to the emoluments of the post of Civil Mistries since they had worked on that post and performed the duties of that post. The court also held that the State Government was estopped from making a submission that the petitioners should not be paid the salary, perks, and emoluments of the post on which they had worked.
Issues: 1. Whether the State Government can rectify a mistake without giving due opportunity of being heard to the affected party? 2. Whether the petitioners had a vested right to the emoluments of the post of Civil Mistries? 3. Whether the State Government is estopped from making a submission that the petitioners should not be paid the salary, perks, and emoluments of the post on which they had worked?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The principle of audi alteram partem is applicable even in administrative matters unless it is prohibited, directly or by implication, by any law. 2. A person who has performed the duties of a post is entitled to the emoluments and perks of that post. 3. The doctrine of estoppel will apply against the State Government if it makes a submission that the petitioners should not be paid the salary, perks, and emoluments of the post on which they have worked.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petitions and set aside the orders of the State Government directing the petitioners to refund the excess payment. The court also prohibited the State Government from making any further recovery from the petitioners.
"It is, however, again requested that all other 7 Misteries were appointed in the same pay scale and applicable for the post of Civil Misteries as done in the case of Mukata Narain Mathur."
The Labour Welfare Officer, P.W.D. (B&R), Jaipur, vide his letter dated 28.1. 79 also made a similar request to the Chief Engineer.
"The case of the petitioner was amongst those seven mistries which were referred to the Respondent No. 4 and who decided the case as above. The typed copy of the letter dated the 25th January 1979 of the Labour Welfare Officer, Jaipur, is enclosed as...."
On behalf of the State, reply has been filed and the submissions made in para 5 of the writ petitions have been admitted. Thus, the petitioners submit that on the basis of admission in para 5 it is an admitted position that the petitioners were Civil Mistries and were working as Civil Mistries and they have rightly been given the benefits of that post. They further submit in para 7 of their respective writ petitions:
"That it is evident from the facts given above that the petitioner is semipermanent Civil Mistry and he is working as Civil Mistry with effect from 1.7.80 add the petitioner is still working as Civil Mistiy...."
Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that he has corrected the typographical mistake in the case of Sokat Ali (S.B.C.W.P. No. 73/81) and it has been mentioned therein as 1.7.70. He further prays that he should be allowed to correct the typographical error in the other writ petitions.
