Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
DEEPINDER SINGH NALWA
Roop Chand – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Deepinder Singh Nalwa, J.
By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the letters dated 06.03.2024 (Annexure P-1) and 20.3.2024 (Annexure P-4), whereby, an amount of Rs. 1,05,042/- has been ordered to be recovered from the petitioner.
2. A perusal of the facts of the case would show that the petitioner was appointed on 01.06.1976 on regular basis in respondent no.3-the Municipal Council, Mullanpur Dakha, Distt. Ludhiana. On attaining the age of superannuation, i.e 60 years being group-D employee, the petitioner retired from service on 31.12.2016. After 7 years of his retirement, respondent no.3, has issued a letter dated 6.3.2024 (Annexure P-1), wherein, it has been mentioned that the petitioner has been overpaid an amount of Rs. 1,05,042/-while releasing arrears of gratuity and leave encashment after retirement. A perusal of the above said letter would also show that the demand of refund of overpaid amount is based on the basis of an affidavit given by the petitioner at the time of retirement to the effect that if excess amount is paid to the petitioner, in that case, the petitioner will return the same to the respondent-Council.
3. The petitioner sub
The court established that recovery of excess payments from retired employees, particularly from lower service classes, is impermissible if it results in undue hardship, reinforcing the principles of....
Any amount paid/received without the authority of law can always be recovered barring few exceptions of extreme hardships but not as a matter of right, in such situations law implies an obligation on....
Point of Law : Relief against recovery is granted by courts not because of any right in the employees, but in equity, exercising judicial discretion to relieve the employees from the hardship that wi....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the recovery of excess payment and interest is permissible based on the written undertakings given by the employee, with the recovery being li....
Recovery of excess payments made to employees is permissible if an undertaking was signed, regardless of the employee's class, unless undue hardship is demonstrated.
Recovery from retired employees is impermissible when excess payments were made without misrepresentation, as per established legal precedents.
Recoveries from retired employees based on erroneous salary payments are impermissible, emphasizing equitable treatment and judicial discretion in enforcing employee rights.
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
