O R D E R

PRAMOD KUMAR DAS, MEMBER (A) :

The applicant has filed this OA challenging the corrigendum dtd.08.02.2017 under Ann.-A/8 and order dtd.28.02.2017 under A/9 with the following prayers:

a) To declare the order dtd 23.05.1997 under Ann.-A/12 as nonest in the eye of law;

b) And to quash the corrigendum dtd.08.02.2017 and order dtd.28.02.2017 under Ann.-A/8 & A/9 respectively;

c) And to quash the order dtd.29.03.2018 and 11.10.2018 under Ann.-A/11 & A/13 respectively;

d) And to direct the Respondents to restore the pay of the applicant at Rs.25,140/- and pay the differential financial benefits i.e., Leave Salary, DCRG, Commuted Value of Pension and Pension;

e) And to direct the Respondents to refund the recovered amount of Rs.1,90,422/- with 12% interest for the delayed period of payment;

And pass any other order as this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit and proper in the interest of justice;

2. The case of the Applicant as inter alia averred in the OA is that applicant while serving as a Sr. clerk was temporarily promoted to the post of Junior Personal Inspector on an ad-hoc basis for a period of 89 days vide order dated 06.05.1996 (A/1). It is submitted that again vide order dated

12.03.1997 (A/2) the adhoc period of applicant to the post of Junior Personnel Inspector was extended while other were reverted to original post. The applicant submits that vide order dated 31.01.2000(A/3) he was promoted to the post of PI Grade III on a regular basis and is pay was correctly re-fixed. It is submitted that Divisional Personnel Officer/Waltair vide letter dated 13.04.200 had clarified to the Senior Divisional Accounts Officer/Waltair regarding long continuation of adhoc post and mentioned that due to exigencies of his services by the administration he was allowed to work on adhoc post. It is submitted that vide letter dated 27.03.2000 (A/4) his pay was fixed as per VI Pay at Rs. 5900/- w.e.f. 01.11.1996 which was also vetted by Sr. Divisional Accounts Officer and arrears of bills were admitted for payment. It is submitted that by virtue of order of punishment he retired from service w.e.f. 04.02.2015. It is submitted that vide order dated 03.02.2015 his services from 06.05.1996 to 31.10.2003 were shown as Jr. Personnel Inspector and his scale of pay as on 01.07.2014 was Rs. 25,140/-. It is submitted that however Respondent No. 4 by issuing corrigendum dated 08.02.2017 (A/8) reduced the pay of the applicant from Rs. 25,140/- to Rs. 24,270/- and all retirement benefits paid in the reduced pay. It is submitted that vide order dated 28.02.2017, Respondent No. 4 took decision to recover an amount of Rs. 1,90,422/- towards over payment of difference of pay and allowance for the period from June 1997 to January 2015 and the same was recovered from DCRG of the applciant. The applicant aggrieved by the order submitted representation to respondent no. 4 dated 20.03.2018 (A/10) and respondent no. 1 on 12.02.2019 (A/14), which were rejected. It is submitted that for the first time an order dated 23.05.1997 was communicated to the applicant wherein it was ordered for reversion of the applicant to his former post of Senior Clerk but the same was never implemented by the respondents at any point of time during his service period. The applicant claims that the sum ordered to be recovered from him is unjust since he has been shouldering higher responsibility for which he has been paid accordingly.

Thus the OA.

3. The respondents have inter alia averred that the claim of uninterrupted ad hoc promotion is not tenable since the Division is not vested with the powers to continue a post on ad hoc basis for prolonged periods, and thus the rate of pay of the applicant has not been reduced erroneously. The respondents have submitted that the applicant was promoted to the post Junior Personnel Inspector on regular basis w.e.f. 31.01.2000. Thus the respondents ordered the recovery of the amount of Rs. 1,90,422/- which was erroneously drawn through his pay in the higher g