Back
2011 Supreme(Jhk) 827
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
Rakesh Ranjan Prasad, J.
Smt. Krishna Devi Petitioner – Appellants.
Vs.
State of Jharkhand & Ors. – Respondent
W.P. (S) No. 3539 of 2008
Decided On : 06.09.2011
Deduction from pension without proper departmental proceeding and violation of natural justice in reducing salary orders are illegal.
Headnote:
ILLEGAL DEDUCTION - Pension Reduction - The court found that the deduction of a sum from the pension and gratuity was illegal, citing the precedent that without holding any departmental proceeding, the alleged excess payment cannot be adjusted from the pension amount, especially from the legal representative of the deceased employee.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner's husband, a headmaster, had his salary reduced after his death, leading to a deduction from the pension and gratuity. The petitioner challenged this order, claiming it was illegal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the deduction from the pension and gratuity was illegal and directed the amount to be refunded to the petitioner. The court also quashed the order reducing the salary, citing a violation of the principle of natural justice.
Issues: The issues involved the legality of the deduction from the pension and gratuity, and the propriety of the order reducing the salary without giving the petitioner an opportunity to be heard.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the precedent that without holding any departmental proceeding, the alleged excess payment cannot be adjusted from the pension amount, especially from the legal representative of the deceased employee. The court also emphasized the violation of the principle of natural justice in passing the order to reduce the salary.
Final Decision: The court allowed the application, directed the refund of the deducted amount from the pension and gratuity, and quashed the order reducing the salary, while granting the authority the liberty to pass a fresh order after giving the petitioner an opportunity to be heard.
R.R. Prasad, J.
I.A. No. 2702 of 2011
1. By filing I. A. No. 2702 of 2011, the order recorded by the headmaster over the service book under which the pay has been fixed at Rs. 8300/-after reducing it from Rs. 9100/- has been challenged.
2. At the same time, prayer has also been made to direct the respondent to refund Rs. 31,161/- which has been recovered from the amount payable towards pension and gratuity.
3. Prayer made in Interlocutory Application is allowed. The Interlocutory Application shall form the part of the main writ application.
W. P. (S) No. 3539 of 2008
4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner's husband Late Ashok Kumar Mandal had been appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher. In course of time he was promoted to the post of Headmaster. He was granted increments in the year 1996, 1997, 1998 and 1999. However, while he was drawing salary of Rs. 9100/- per month, he died on 07.08.2010. After the death of the petitioner's husband an order sanctioning pension was passed taking the salary of the petitioner's husband as Rs. 9100/- per month and accordingly, the family pension was fixed which was drawn by the petitioner for about six years. Suddenly an order was passed on 09.06.2007 (Annexure -3/iii) whereby salary of Rs. 9100/- on which the pension was fixed was reduced to Rs. 8300/- and thereby an order was passed to recover a sum of Rs. 31,161/- which infact has already been deducted from the amount of the pension and the gratuity.
6. Being aggrieved by that order, the petitioner has moved to this Court challenging the order under which the pay was fixed at Rs. 8300/- and a sum of Rs. 31,161/- was deducted from the amount of pension and gratuity.
7. Mr. Afaque Ahmad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that so far the order of recovery of the aforesaid amount from the pension and gratuity is concerned, that is illegal in view of the ratio laid down by this Court in the case of Most. Sumitra Devi v. State of Jharkhand through Chief Engineer R.C. Deptt. & Ors., reported in 2007(4) JCR 472 (Jhr)(FB), and hence, the said amount be directed to be refunded to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that so far as the order under which salary of the petitioner's husband was reduced to Rs. 8300/- from Rs. 9100/-is concerned, that is also illegal as that order has been passed without giving any opportunity of being heard to the petitioner or to have her say in the matter and hence that order is also fit to be set aside.
8. I do find substance in the submission advanced on behalf of the petitioner. Admittedly on the death of the petitioner's husband family pension was fixed taking the salary of the petitioner's husband as Rs. 9100/- per month which the petitioner's husband was drawing at the time of death. After six years of grant of pension, it got transpired that petitioner's husband had not passed the departmental examination of Hindi noting and drafting still he had been given increments on the basis of which his pay was passed to which he was not entitled to and thereby an order was passed for recovery of sum of Rs. 31,161/-which is said to have been drawn in excess by the petitioner's husband from the amount of pension and gratuity, which order is quite illegal in view of the ratio laid down by this Court in case of Most. Sumitra Devi v. State of Jharkhand through Chief Engineer R.C. Deptt. & Ors. (supra) wherein it has been held that without holding any departmental proceeding under Rule 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules to find out as to whether any misconduct has been committed by the employee and without conducting any inquiry to find out that any mistake was committed by the official, the alleged excess payment cannot be adjusted out of the pension amount and that too from the legal representative of the deceased employee. While holding so the
