Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
JAGMOHAN BANSAL
Shivani Joshi – Appellant
Versus
State Bank Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Jagmohan Bansal, J. (Oral)
The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting aside of order dated 09.01.2020 (Annexure P-1) whereby respondent has recovered a sum of Rs. 1,79,121/- from the family pension of the petitioner.2. The husband of the petitioner was working with Indian Navy. He retired from Indian Navy on 31.07.2011 and as per applicable rules, started getting pension from Government of India. The payment was made through respondent-State Bank of India. The said employee passed away on 08.12.2019 and thereafter, the petitioner-wife of deceased employee started getting family pension. The respondent after death of aforesaid employee came to know that bank had made excess payment of Rs. 1,79,121/- during 01.07.2014 to 30.11.2019. The respondent has recovered aforesaid amount from the family pension of the petitioner.
3. Mr. Anupam Singla, counsel for the petitioner would submit that respondent made alleged excess payment during the life time of petitioner's husband and respondent cannot recover alleged amount from the family pension.
4. Mr. Karan Kumar Jund, Senior Panel Counsel, submits that no recovery of
No recovery of excess pension can be made from legal heirs of a deceased employee in the absence of statutory provisions, affirming the constitutional right to pension under Article 300A.
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....
The excess amount paid to an employee may not be recoverable if it was not due to misstatement or fraud on the part of the employee, as established in State of Punjab & Ors. v. Rafiq Masih.
Recovery of excess pension payments may be impermissible in certain situations, especially when it would be harsh or prejudicial to the beneficiary's survival.
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 from family pension is impermissible when the recipient is not at fault for the overpayment.
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
