Recovery of excess payments from retired employees without due process violates natural justice principles, as established in Rafiq Masih's case.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Namit Kumar, J. (Oral)

The petitioner, who has rendered 33 years of service in Punjab State Power Corporation Limited, retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.03.2020, has approached this Court by way of filing the present writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, for issuing a writ in the nature of ceritiorari, for quashing of the order dated 23.05.2022 (Annexure P-6), whereby a sum of Rs. 1,55,042/-, have been recovered from the leave encashment amount.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the amount of Rs. 1,55,042/- has been recovered from the leave encashment, payable to the petitioner, in violation of the principles of natural justice as neither any opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioner before effecting the recovery nor any show cause notice was issued to him. The reason assigned in the impugned order is that the said amount has been recovered on account of one excess increment granted to the petitioner in the year 2005 and sought to be recovered in the year 2020, due to wrong fixation of pay. No details have been given either in the impugned order or in the written statement filed by the respondents with regard to the details of excess salary paid to the petitioner.

3. On issuance of notice of motion, written statement on behalf of the respondents has been filed, in which it has been stated as under:-

"4. That the averments made by the petitioner are wrong and denied as petitioner was not promoted by the respondents to the post of TG-1/Mech as alleged. In pursuance to appointment letter no.15921 dated 18.11.2005 (Annexure R-1) the petitioner was appointed for the post of TG1/Mech. as he was already working as TG-2/Mech. His name was considered and selected by direct appointment as TG-1/Mech. in the office of C.E/GGSSTP, Ropar on 04.01.2006.

At that time, he was drawing basic pay of Rs. 5300 but inadvertently at the time of pay fixation his case was considered as a case of promotion and he was given one increment and his basic pay was fixed at Rs. 5500. In the year 2020 as he was nearing to retirement on 31.03.2020 when his service book was got audited and it was pointed out by Account office, GGSSTP, Ropar that at the time of joining as TG-1/Mech on dt. 04.01.2006 he was wrongly given one increment and his basic pay was wrongly fixed at Rs. 5500 by mistaking it as a case of promotion when in fact he was not promoted but was selected/appointed as TG-1/Mech directly vide appointment letter. Then his basic pay was on 04.01.2006 was revised and reduced to Rs. 5300 instead of Rs. 5500.

Accordingly, his subsequent increments were re-fixed in view of clarification issued by Dy. Secy. Fin, PSPCL Patiala vide memo no.19920 dt. 23.04.2015 (Annexure R2). It was ordered that a recovery of Rs. 1,55,042/- be affected from pay of the petitioner. This recovery was for the period of 04.01.2006 to 31.03.2020 up to the date of retirement. The action of the respondents is perfectly legal and as per rules and regulations governing the petitioner.

In view of the submissions made above the present Civil Writ Petition deserves to be dismissed, as the petitioner has no claim against the answering respondents i.e. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL)."

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner approached respondent No.2 and duly apprised him that no recovery is pending against him and he never received any communication from the department qua any recovery and, therefore, feeling aggrieved, the petitioner served a legal notice dated 01.02.2022 upon the respondents and when no response was received by him, he approached this Court by way of filing a writ petition i.e. CWP No.5553 of 2022, which was disposed of on 21.03.2022, with a direction to respondent No.2 therein to decide the legal notice within a period of 08 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and thereafter, the impugned order dated 23.05.2022 was passed by resp