IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AT AGARTALA
BISWAJIT PALIT, J.
Saral Bahadur Molsom S/o Late Rana Manik Molsom - Appellant
Versus
The State of Tripura - Respondent
W.P. (C) No. 780 of 2024
Decided On : 17-02-2025
JUDGMENT :
BISWAJIT PALIT, J.
1. Heard Mr. Samarjit Bhattacharjee, Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Karnajit De, Learned Addl. G.A. appearing on behalf of the State-respondents.
2. By means of this filing this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs :
i. Pass an ad interim Order the operation of the Memorandum, dated 19.05.2023, issued by the Block Development Officer, Ompi R.D. Block, till disposal of the instant Writ Petition.
ii. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why Writ in the nature of mandamus and/or Order/direction shall not be issued whereby quashing and cancelling the impugned Memorandum, dated, 19.05.2023, issued by the Block Development Officer, Ompi R.D. Block.
iii. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why Writ in the nature of mandamus and/or Order/direction shall not be issued whereby directing the Respondents not to cause any recovery from the Petitioner in connection with his ACP-I financial benefits.
iv. Issue Rule upon the Respondents to show cause as to why Writ in the nature of mandamus and/or Order/direction shall not be issued whereby directing the Respondents to reimburse the Petitioner with the money already deducted from his salary in the guise of recovery consequent to the issuance of the Memorandum, dated 19.05.2023.
v. Make the rules absolute.
vi. Call for records.
vii. Pass any further order/orders as this Hon'ble High Court considered fit and proper.”
3. The brief facts mentioned in the writ petition are in short is that vide Memo No.F./122-A/DM/S/ESTT/151 dated 19.02.2004 issued by the District Magistrate & Collector, Gomati District the petitioner was appointed to the post of Computer Operator in Community Information Centre (CIC), under the Directorate of Information Technology (Department of Industries and Commerce) on contract basis for two years on the terms and conditions mentioned therein and accordingly, the petitioner joined under the Respondents on 21.02.2004.
4. After that vide notification dated 27.06.2009, issued by the Joint Secretary, Rural Development Department, Government of Tripura, the Governor had been pleased to grant regular scale of pay of Rs.4200-8650/- to 52 Computer Operators (CIC) (Group-C, Non-Gazetted), including the Petitioner after continuous service without break on fixed pay basis. It was also mentioned that the past services of those 52 numbers of Computer Operators under CIC rendered in the IT Department would be counted towards future service benefit, and the benefit of regular scale had been extended to those 52 incumbents w.e.f. 01.12.2008.
5. The petitioner further asserted that thereafter vide order dated 08.08.2012 issued by the District Magistrate & Collector, Gomati District, the petitioner along with three others were re-designated as Senior Computer Assistant with fixed emoluments of Rs.7,060/- only per month (being 75% of the entry level pay in the pay Band-2 of Rs.5,310 – 24,000/- and grade pay of Rs.2,100/-) w.e.f. the date mentioned in the said order. In the list mentioned in the aforesaid order, name of the petitioner appeared at Sl. No.01 and his date of joining in service has been reflected on 21.02.2004. It was also further mentioned in the said order that the date of effect of re-designation of the petitioner as Senior Computer Assistant would be w.e.f. 01.01.2006 and financial benefit would be given effect from 01.01.2009.
6. Further, the petitioner was allowed the benefit of ACP-I on completion of his 10 years of regular and satisfactory service from the date of his entry into Government service i.e. on 21.02.2004 and the effective date from which such ACP shall be admissible was determined as 21.02.2014 and accordingly, the petitioner was allowed one increment on the pay of existing pay Band and Grade Pay plus next available Grade Pay as benefit of financial up-gradation under the ACP Scheme.
7. Thereafter, vide Memorandum dated 31.12.2016, issued by the Block Devel
Recovery of excess payments from employees in Class-III and Class-IV services is impermissible, especially when the excess has been enjoyed for over five years.
Recovery of excess payments from Group-C employees beyond five years is impermissible, emphasizing equitable treatment and adherence to Supreme Court guidelines.
Recovery of excess payments from employees in Group-C service is impermissible after five years, emphasizing fairness and justice in employment matters.
Recovery of excess payments from Group-C employees is impermissible after five years, as established in Rafiq Masih's case.
Recovery of excess payments from Group-C employees is impermissible if the excess payment was made for over five years, as established in prior judgments.
Recovery of excess payments from Group-C employees is impermissible after five years, ensuring equitable treatment in employment matters.
Recovery from retired employees is impermissible when excess payments were made without misrepresentation, as per established legal precedents.
The court emphasized that recovery of excess payments from Group-D employees is impermissible, and actions taken without due process violate principles of natural justice.
Three-tier pay structure excludes employees from ACP benefits; recovery of erroneous excess payments barred from Class-III employees, retirees, over five years without misrepresentation.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.