JUDGMENT & ORDER :

(Golmei Gaiphullshillu, J.)

[1] Heard Mr. Athouba Khaidem, learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants; Mr. L. Anand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 1; and Mr. S. Suresh, learned counsel appears on behalf of respondent No. 2.

[2] The present writ appeal has been filed by the State Appellants under IV-A of the Manipur High Court Rule, 2019 against the impugned Judgment and Order dated 02.08.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 729 of 2019 by the Hon’ble Single Judge with the following prayer:

(i) to admit the Appeal and call for records of the Writ petition;

(ii) to set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 02.08.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 729 of 2019 as the same was passed without appreciating the materials of the case.

(iii) to pass any appropriate order(s) or direction which the Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper.

[3] The above referred to W.P.(C) No. 729 of 2019 was filed by the respondent No.1/petitioner to quash a portion of the impugned statement dated 13.10.2017 issued by the office of the Accountant General, Manipur, on the basis of which a sum of Rs. 5,82,002/- was recovered as excess payment/over payment from the gratuity amount and dearness relief after his retirement and to refund the official respondents to refund the said amount with admissible interest.

[4] The learned counsel for the respondent No. 1/petitioner was initially appointed as Road Mohorrir in Minor Irrigation Department, Government of Manipur in the Scale of pay of Rs. 215-340 on 14.05.1980 and was retired from his service on 28.02.2017 on attaining the age of superannuation. After his retirement, the pension paper was submitted to the authorities for processing his entitled retiral benefits. In due course of time, the office of the respondent no.2/third respondent issued pension payment order along with the impugned statement showing the details of calculation of his retirement benefits and deduction of overpayment from his gratuity and dearness relief. He further submitted that the impugned portion of the statement dated 13.10.2017 shows the calculated amount of total dearness relief as Rs. 1,37,033/-; gratuity payment order amount to Rs. 5,46,000/- and commutation payment order amount to Rs. 2,97,148/-. While so, to the utter shock, an amount of Rs. 5,82,002/- was deducted from the total amount of gratuity payment order of Rs. 5,46,000/- and the remaining balance amount of Rs. 36,000/- from the amount of dearness relief of Rs. 1,37,033/-.

[5] According to the learned counsel for the respondent No. 1/petitioner there was an illegal deduction/recovery for over payment of a huge amount of Rs. 5,82,002/- and the same has been completely curtailed and arbitrarily forfeited by the respondent authorities from the retirement benefit of the respondent no.1/petitioner which would be impermissible in law. In fact, the aforesaid deduction made the respondent no. 1/petitioner to suffer from untold miseries and hardships. Being aggrieved by the action of appellants/respondents, the respondent No. 1/petitioner submitted a representation on 19.08.2019 requesting refund of the said amount. Though the said representation was duly received by the office of the appellants, no action has been taken till date.

[6] According to the respondent No. 1/petitioner that the alleged overpayment by the official appellants/respondents was not on account of any misrepresentation or fraud on the part of the respondent no.1/petitioner. Therefore, the respondent no.1/petitioner cannot be held liable and made to suffer for the wrong committed by the officials. The respondent no.1/petitioner is presently facing lot of hardship for survival with the meager retirement benefits he is receiving after the deduction/recovery made by the appellants/respondents authorities. Thus, a prayer has been made to dismiss the appeal as devoid of merit and to pass an appropriate order for the ends of justice.

In support of his case, he has relied upon the f