HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
FARJAND ALI
Omi Devi, (Lrs of Bagtwar Ram Rao), W/o Late Shri Bagtwar Ram Rao – Appellant
Versus
Chief Manager (Hrd), Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank – Respondent
Order :
FARJAND ALI, J.
1. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a direction to the respondents to refund an amount of Rs.2,47,000/- which was recovered from her husband’s leave encashment vide order dated03.02.2018.
2. Briefly stated, the petitioner’s husband joined the respondent Bank as a Branch Manager on 01.03.1985 and retired from service at the Chaba Branch on 31.01.2018 (PF/ID No. 3183), who died on 11.01.2023. His Death Certificate dated 01.02.2023 issued by Govt. Of Rajasthan, Directorate of Economics & Statistics, Jodhpur (Annex.A/1) is on record.
2.1. Under the Bank’s Leave Travel Concession (LTC) Scheme, her husband was sanctioned a sum of Rs.2,47,000/- for his approved travel plan, which was credited to his account through a sanction letter dated 07.11.2016. He undertook the journey between 07.11.2016 to 14.11.2016, and thereafter submitted his travel expense statement of Rs.2,69,111/- on 12.12.2016 for settlement.
2.2. Prior to his retirement, petitioner’s husband submitted a representation dated 11.10.2017 seeking early finalization of his LTC claim. However, upon superannuation, although all other
Recovery of excess payments from retirees or without due process breaches principles of natural justice, violating Articles 14, 16, and 300-A of the Constitution.
Recovery of excess payments from employees must consider the impact on individuals, particularly retirees, and may be deemed iniquitous if it leads to hardship.
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 made to employees is impermissible where no fault exists on the employee's part and payments have spanned over five years, protecting livelihood rights.
Point of Law : Relief against recovery is granted by courts not because of any right in the employees, but in equity, exercising judicial discretion to relieve the employees from the hardship that wi....
Recovery from retired employees is impermissible when excess payments were made without misrepresentation, as per established legal precedents.
Recovery from employees belonging to Class-III and Class-IV service impermissible as per the Constitution of India and relevant judgments.
The court established that recovery of excess payments from retired employees, particularly from lower service classes, is impermissible if it results in undue hardship, reinforcing the principles of....
Recoveries from retired employees based on erroneous salary payments are impermissible, emphasizing equitable treatment and judicial discretion in enforcing employee rights.
Recovery of excess payments from retired employees without due process violates natural justice principles, as established in Rafiq Masih's case.
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.