HIGH COURT OF JAMMU &KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR
RAJNESH OSWAL
Jabeen Kounsar – Appellant
Versus
Ut of J&K – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the instant petition is taken up for final disposal.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved of the action of respondent No.3 whereby he has ordered recovery of excess amount of family pension paid to the petitioner amounting to Rs.7,18,268/ and has further directed the Manager, J&K Bank, Branch Chanapora, to recover an amount of Rs.3,59,134/ at first instance from the family pension of the petitioner and rest in the instalments @ Rs. 7,500/ per month.
3. The sole contention of the petitioner is that the excess family pension was paid to her neither on account of any fraudulent act nor any misrepresentation on the part of the petitioner but was paid to her on account of fault of respondents No.1 to 3, as such, the said amount cannot be recovered from her.
4. The reply has been filed by respondent No.2 stating therein that the said respondent received the case of the petitioner for revision of pension under Government Order No.222-F and after scrutiny of the case, it was found that the petitioner was paid enhanced payment beyond 1st July, 2013 whereas the petitioner was supposed to get the enhanced benefit for seven years but she
Excess payments made without fraud or misrepresentation are not recoverable from employees, emphasizing justice and equity in recovery actions.
Recovery of excess pension payments without notice or opportunity to be heard violates principles of natural justice, and such recovery is impermissible if no fraud or misrepresentation is involved.
Recovery of excess pension from a family pensioner after significant delay is impermissible without misrepresentation or fraud, violating principles of natural justice.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that no recovery can be made from a retired employee or the legal heirs of the retired employee, or with regard to an amount which was being paid f....
Recovery of excess pension payments may be impermissible in certain situations, especially when it would be harsh or prejudicial to the beneficiary's survival.
Recoveries from pensioners are permissible only under strict guidelines to prevent hardship, emphasizing protection for retired employees against unjust financial demands.
The excess amount paid to an employee may not be recoverable if it was not due to misstatement or fraud on the part of the employee, as established in State of Punjab & Ors. v. Rafiq Masih.
Recovery of excess pension payments is impermissible if it causes undue hardship to the recipient, especially when the recipient is not at fault.
The impermissibility of recovery in certain situations and the iniquitous nature of recovery after a long period.
The court balanced the legal obligation of the petitioner's declaration with the petitioner's financial circumstances by directing a reduced recovery rate of 20% of the family pension.
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.