Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR
Ashish Shroti
Shiv Singh Tomar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
ORDER :
Ashish Shroti, J.
1. Regard being had to the similitude of the issue involved in this batch of writ petitions, they are heard analogously and decided by this common order. For convenience sake, facts of Writ Petition No.29642/2022 are taken into consideration.
2. The petitioners in these writ petitions have retired from the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector/Sub-Inspector (Ministerial). On account of certain disputes with regard to fixation of their salary, respondents have issued the impugned orders directing recovery of excess amount paid to the petitioners. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has challenged the impugned order of recovery on the ground that excess amount paid to the petitioners because of erroneous fixation of their salary can not be recovered from the petitioners from their retiral dues. He placed reliance upon the order passed by this Court in the case of Tahsildar Singh Vs. State of M.P. & Ors. in W.P. No.2629/2021 as also Full Bench judgment in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh & others Vs. Jagdish Prasad Dubey reported in 2024(2) M.P.L.J. 198.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents/State supported the impugned order and submitted tha
Recovery of excess payments from retired employees is impermissible under certain conditions, particularly relating to Class III and IV service classifications and time limits for recovery.
Recoveries from retired employees for excess payments are generally impermissible, especially where undue hardship is evident, as established by prior judgments.
Recovery of excess payments from retired employees is impermissible, considering hardships and the principles established in relevant precedents.
Retired employees cannot be subjected to recovery of excess payments made due to erroneous salary fixation, considering hardship and the nature of undertaken indemnity bonds.
Recovery of excess payments from retired employees is impermissible due to hardship, and cannot be enforced when the employee is not responsible for erroneous salary fixation.
Recovery from retired employees for excess payments is impermissible, especially regarding interest, as it imposes undue hardship and lacks lawful justification when errors are not the employees' res....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the recovery of an amount from a retired employee, in the absence of misrepresentation or fraud, and due to a misconception leading to the exc....
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
