Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Mr.Justice SHAMIM AHMED, J
A.Pavunammal, W/o.B.Aandappan (Late) – Appellant
Versus
Accountant General (A&E), Department of Treasuries and Accounts – Respondent
ORDER :
Shamim Ahmed, J.
1. This Writ Petition has been filed, under the Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records, relating to the order passed by the 3rd Respondent, in proceedings in Na.Ka.No.312A, dated 22.08.2022 and to quash the same.
2. The facts of case, in a nutshell, led to filing of this Writ Petition and necessary for disposal of same, are that the Petitioner's husband, B.Aandappan had joined as a Village Head Man on 17.05.1957 and after his retirement, he died on 19.11.2017. By the GO.Ms.No.828 (Rev), dated 23.08.1996, family pension was sanctioned in favour of the Petitioner from 19.12.2018 onwards. The Petitioner received the entitled pending pension amount and she also started to receive the family pension at the rate of Rs.6,750/.- p.m. While so, in the year 2022, the 3rd Respondent had passed the impugned order, dated 22.08.2022, stating that since it was found, during the audit conducted by the concerned Authorities that an excess family pension amount to the tune of Rs.2,94,233/- was paid to her for the period from 20.11.2017 to 31.07.2022, the Petitioner had to repay the above said excess amount. From 01.08.202
Recovery of excess pension from a family pensioner after significant delay is impermissible without misrepresentation or fraud, violating principles of natural justice.
Recovery of excess pension payments may be impermissible in certain situations, especially when it would be harsh or prejudicial to the beneficiary's survival.
The impermissibility of recovery in certain situations and the iniquitous nature of recovery after a long period.
Recoveries from pensioners are permissible only under strict guidelines to prevent hardship, emphasizing protection for retired employees against unjust financial demands.
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 payment from retired employees and the impermissible situations for recovery.
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.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
