Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI
Gaja Nand – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Harsimran Singh Sethi J. (Oral)
In the present writ petition, the grievance being raised by the petitioner is that after his retirement, certain recoveries have been done from his pensionary benefits which is not admissible hence, an amount of Rs.35,492/-, which has been deducted from his pensionary benefits, is liable to be refunded by the State.
2. Further, prayer of the petitioner is that his pay was not fixed in accordance with law hence, the respondents be directed to fix his pay in accordance with law keeping in view the pay being given to an employee who was junior to the petitioner.
3. At the time of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prayer with regard to re-fixation of the pay of the petitioner be treated as not pressed keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has retired from service in the year 2005 and the present writ petition was filed after 13 years of retirement and that too claiming the service benefits.
4. Upon notice of motion, the respondents have filed the reply wherein, the respondents have stated that the benefit which was not admissible to the petitioner in the year 1996 was wrongly extended to him and after the retiremen
Recovery from retired employees is impermissible barring exceptional circumstances such as fraud or misrepresentation.
Recovering excess payments from retirees without misrepresentation violates principles of natural justice.
Recovery from retired employees, or employees who are due to retire within one year of the order of recovery, is impermissible in law.
Recovery of excess payments from retired employees is impermissible without adherence to natural justice, especially when payments were made for an extended period without notice.
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....
An employee cannot receive both salary and pension for overlapping periods; acceptance of excess payments with knowledge leads to lawful recovery.
Recovery from retired employees is impermissible unless an undertaking was provided prior to retirement, and pay re-fixation cannot occur after a long time gap.
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
