Back
OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, RAJAN ROY
Union Of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Of Information And Broadcasting, New Delhi – Appellant
Versus
Arun Prakash Srivastava – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(1) Heard Sri S.B. Pandey, learned Senior Advocate and Deputy Solicitor General of India assisted by Sri Ashwani Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners in all the petitions and Ms. Savita Jain, learned counsel for the private respondents.
(2) By means of this bunch of writ petitions, similar orders of the same nature passed in separate Original Applications involving similar facts and case, have been challenged. Writ-A No.6056 of 2024 has been taken up as the leading writ petition with the consent of the parties.
(3) The case of the petitioners herein is that all the respondents in this petitions had been granted three promotions/financial upgradation, therefore, in view of three promotions already having been granted to them, they were not entitled to any financial upgradation under the 'Assured Career Progression Scheme (ACPS)' which came into force w.e.f. 01.09.2008 as modified. Nevertheless, they were wrongly granted the benefit of 'Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme (MACPS) (3rd financial upgradation)' w.e.f. 01.09.2008 in the form of Grade Pay Rs.4800/-. They were erroneously given the benefit of 3rd financial upgradation w.e.f. 01.09.2008 vide ord
Recovery of excess payments is permissible when employees are aware of overpayment and accept conditions of pay fixation.
Employees cannot be penalized for erroneous financial upgrades awarded without their fault; recovery of overpayments is impermissible in equity.
Recovery of excess pay from retiring employee impermissible if no fraud or misrepresentation, per Rafiq Masih guidelines.
Review petition dismissed due to inordinate delay and laches; no ACPS benefits for Group A posts with feeder grades.
Recovery of excess pay impermissible if employee retires within one year of order or excess paid over five years, absent fraud.
The court ruled that recoveries from Group-C employees nearing retirement are impermissible, reaffirming protections established in Rafiq Masih.
The court ruled that recovery of excess payments, if made after significant time lapses, is impermissible under the law, emphasizing financial upgradation rights under the MACP scheme.
Recovery of excess pay from retired Group 'D' employee due to departmental error in MACP grant is impermissible without notice; refund directed, but lower pay fixation upheld as mistake rectifiable.
The unilateral withdrawal of financial benefits without due process violates principles of natural justice, necessitating communication of adverse ACR entries to the employee.
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
