SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 11904

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Ajay Pratap Singh, J
Amar Nath s/o late Alakh Singh – Appellant
Versus
The Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance – Respondent
O.A. No. 050/00541/2021



Advocates:
For the Applicants/Petitioners: Shri M.P. Dixit
For the Respondents: Shri Deepak Kumar

Verification of pensionary benefits must restrict to 24 months preceding retirement; unjust recovery prohibited if no fraud is proven.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - CCS Pension Rules, 1972 - Issue regarding fixation of pension based on last pay drawn - Applicant contested that his last pay of Rs.80,200/- was incorrectly reduced to Rs.74,300/-, leading to unjust recovery from his gratuity and pension benefits - Tribunal ruled that verification of emoluments beyond 24 months preceding retirement was impermissible and that reduction in pay was arbitrary. Applicant entitled to reliefs sought - Directions issued for recalculation and refund of amounts unjustifiably recovered. (Paras 24, 26)

(B) Employment Law - Recovery of wrong payments - Recovery from pensionary benefits is prohibited where there is no fraud or misrepresentation by the employee - Relevant precedents were discussed emphasizing the protection against recovery post-retirement, especially after lengthy delays. (Paras 20, 21)

Facts of the case:
Applicant superannuated as Superintendent Customs with a last drawn pay of Rs.80,200/-, challenged the PPO citing erroneous last pay fixation and subsequent over-recovery.

Findings of Court:
Contrary to the ruling of the respondents, the applicant's last pay is fixed at Rs.80,200/- with unjust recovery being ordered to be refunded.

Issues: Correctness of emoluments verification prior to retirement and recovery implications.

Ratio Decidendi: The Tribunal upheld legal provisions limiting verification of pay discrepancies to 24 months prior to retirement, asserting the applicant's pension entitlement based on last pay drawn and prohibiting unjust recovery.

Result: Application allowed; compensation and pension revision directed.

Table of Content
1. incorrect pay fixation identified. (Para 3 , 4)
2. applicant argues for correct pension and against arbitrary reductions. (Para 7 , 8)
3. legal provisions governing pension revisions established. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
4. prohibited recovery of excess amount without fraud established. (Para 20 , 21 , 24)

ORDER

AS PER : AJAY PRATAP SINGH, MEMBER [JUDICIAL]

By way of present OA under Section 19 of Administrative Tribunals, Act 1985 the applicant is seeking direction to declare entry at serial no.4A in Pension Payment Order [PPO] dated 02.02.2021 (Annexure A-1) showing last pay drawn Rs.74,300/- as null and void and also to direct the respondents to calculate and re-fix applicant’s pension and pensionary benefits treating his last pay drawn Rs.80,200/-. Applicant is also seeking direction to the respondents to refund already recovered amount against DCRG to the tune of Rs.6,90,894/- with Rs.22,512/- recovered on monthly basis from his salary from December 2020 onwards, on account of overpayment made to him. So also a direction be issued to the respondents to revise and re-fix the entire pensionary benefits, including DCRG, commuted value of pension, leave salary etc. treating applicant’s last pay drawn Rs.80,200/- at the time of his superannuation with all consequential benefits and statutory interest from the date of entitlement till the date of actual payment.

PRAYER

2. The main relief (as extracted from the OA) sought by the applicant in the instant OA are as under:-

“8.1 That your Lordships may graciously be pleased to declare the entry made with respect to Pay Last Drawn Rs.74,300/- at serial 4A of the Pension Payment Order dated 02.02.2021 as contained in Annexure A/1 as null void and ab initio wrong.

8.2 That your Lordships may further be pleased to declare the impugned action of Respondents with respect to the fixation of entire pensionary benefits on the basis of reduced pay of Rs.74,300/- in place of Rs.82,200/- as null, void and illegal.

8.3 That your Lordships may graciously be pleased to direct/command the respondents to release/refund the recovered amount DCRG amounting to Rs.6,90,894/- (Six lacs ninety thousand eight hundred ninety four) together with Rs.22,512/- recovered from the monthly salary of December 2020 towards overpayment.

8.4 That your Lordships may graciously be pleased to direct/command the respondents to fix and revise the entire pensionary benefits such as pension, DCRG, Commuted Value of Pension, Leave Salary etc at the basic pay of Rs.80,200/- i.e. last pay drawn at the time of his superannuation instead of Rs.74,300/- with all consequential benefits including statutory interest without any delay.

8.5 Any other relief or relies including the cost of the proceeding may be allowed in favour of the applicant.”

FACTS IN BRIEF

3. Briefly stated facts as adumbrated by the applicant in the OA are that applicant was working as Superintendent, Customs Division, Motihari and superannuated on 31.12.2020 with basic pay Rs.80,200/-. The respondents in an arbitrary manner issued PPO dated 02.02.2021 in favour of the applicant calculating his pension and pensionary benefits based on erroneous last pay drawn Rs.74,300/- whereas he was superannuated drawing last pay Rs.80,200/-. As per the entry in PPO showing that even on the basis of reduced pay of Rs.74,300/-, applicant was entitled for DCRG amount of Rs.14,34,362/- but the respondents have reduced and actually credited Rs.7,43,468/- only, whereas Rs.6,90,894/- has been recovered as adjustment against alleged overpayment made to the applicant between October 1993 and January 1998.

4. It is also the case of the applicant that the respondents have reduced DCRG amount and made recoveries from his pensionary benefits to the tune of Rs.22,512/- on monthly basis from December, 2020 treating that the applicant has drawn pay wrongly and fixation made between October 1993 to January 1998 was due to erroneous fixation of basic pay and, hence, pay was reduced from Rs.8

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top