Recovery guidelines barring excess payments from retired lower-grade employees inapplicable to amounts paid beyond entitlement curtailed by cumulative-effect disciplinary punishment, absent proof of appellate modification thereto.

JUDGMENT :

This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 11.12.2024 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Circuit Bench at Ranchi in O.A. No.051/00091/2022, whereby and whereunder, the learned Tribunal has dismissed the said original application by declining to pass any positive direction on the prayer made in the original application.

Facts:

2. The brief facts of the case as per the pleading made in the writ petition which requires to be enumerated herein, reads as under:

The writ petitioner was appointed as Office Clerk in D.R.M. Office on 12.12.1986. The petitioner was then posted as T.C. in East Central Railway, Gomoh and he was promoted to the post of T.T.I., East Central Railway, Gomoh and has retired on 31.01.2019 from the post of C.T.I., East Central Railway, Gomoh. The petitioner while working as T.T.I., East Central Railway, Gomoh, a proceeding was initiated against him by the authority and a notice of punishment, vide Notice No.C744/Vig./Major/07, dated 18.01.2008 through which the petitioner was punished with reduction in pay in time scale for two years by two stages with cumulative effect.

Thereafter, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the appellate authority i.e. A.D.R.M., East Central Railway, Dhanbad and the petitioner has appeared before the appellate authority and explained every pros and cons of the matter and after going through the case of the petitioner, the appellate authority partly allowed the appeal by converting/reducing the punishment from cumulative to non-cumulative, vide order dated 29.03.2008, but copy of the order was not provided to the petitioner, and after two years, pay scale of the petitioner was automatically restored, since the punishment was converted into non-cumulative one.

The petitioner was quite confident that the said order of the appellate authority must have been recorded in the service record maintained by the Commercial Department. The petitioner has no grievance since his pay scale was restored considering the appellate order, converting his punishment from cumulative effect to non-cumulative effect.

Thereafter, the petitioner superannuated on 31.01.2019 and he was surprised to know that due to non-entry of the appellate order, passed by the appellate authority i.e. A.D.R.M., Dhanbad in the service record of the petitioner, his pay scale has been reduced from Rs.64,100/- to Rs.60,400/- and a sum of Rs.2,85,000/- has been deducted/recovered from the retiral benefits of the petitioner towards so called excess amount of pay.

3. The writ petitioner/applicant being aggrieved with the order by which a sum of Rs.2,85,000/- has been directed to be recovered from the petitioner, has assailed the said order before Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Circuit Bench at Ranchi by filing Original Application being O.A. No.051/00091/2022.

4. The said Original Application was filed based upon the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab and Ors. v. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and Ors., reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334

5. It had been contended before the learned Tribunal that on conclusion of the departmental proceeding, the punishment of withholding two annual increments with cumulative ef