CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL SRINAGAR BENCH, SRINAGAR O.A. No. 523 OF 2025 Date of Order This the 21st of May, 2025 :

C O R A M HON’BLE MR. D.S. MAHRA, MEMBER(J)

Rifat Ara (Aged 63 years)

D/o: Ali Mohd Khan R/o: Gulshan Nagar-B Methan Chanapora, Near Basharat Colony/Masjid Gousia Srinagar-190001 ………. Applicant By Advocate:

Mr. Hilal Ahmad Wani, Advocate, for applicant.

VERSUS

1. UT OF Jammu & Kashmir through its Principal Accountant General, J&K, Srinagar -190001

2. Sr. Accountant Officer (Pension) (PNR) Srinagar-

190001

3. Chief Engineer, (R&B), PWD Srinagar-190001. 4. Superintending Engineer, PWD (R&B) Raj Bagh Srinagar-190008

5. Executive Engineer Landscaping Division PWD (R&B)

Srinagar-190001 .…..Respondents By Advocate :-

Mr. Jeetender Singh, GA and Irshad Ahmad Wani, Advocate, for respondents.

O R D E R (O R A L)

Hon’ble Mr. D.S. MAHRA, M[J]

1. Learned Counsel for both the parties are present.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant was working in the respondent’s department as class IV employees, and the respondents had extended the benefit of pay revision in terms of SRO 59 dated 06.02.1990, in favour of the applicant. The applicant retired from her services on 01.09.2022, and her case for grant of pension and other retiral benefits was forwarded to the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. However, the said respondents without any authority and jurisdiction had released the pensionery benefits while excluding the benefits of pay revision given to her in lieu of SRO 59 dated

06.02.1990.

3. The learned Counsel for the applicant has submitted that in the identical matters, Central Administrative Tribunal Jammu Bench, directed the respondents not to recover any amount from the applicants and to pay the retiral benefits in their favour granted in terms of SRO 59 dated 06.02.1990. He has further submitted that this Tribunal in the similarly situated matters bearing OA No. 592/2023, titled “Mehraj-ud-Din and ors VS UT of J&K & ors” decided on 27.09.2024, and OA No. 117/2024, titled “ Ghulam Ahmad Malla vs. UT of J&K and others” decided on 12.02.2025 had also directed the respondents to release all benefits in favour of the applicants as per the pay revision, granted in their favour vide SRO 59 dated 06.02.1990.

4. The learned counsel for the applicant has fairly submitted that it will suffice, if the respondents are directed to release the pensionery benefits in favour of the applicant, as per pay revision, granted to her in terms of SRO 59 dated 06.02.1990, and in light of the orders passed on 27.09.2024, by this Tribunal in OA No. 592/2023 titled Mehraj-ud-Din and Ors Vs. UT of J&K and Ors, and OA No. 117/2024, titled “ Ghulam Ahmad Malla vs. UT of J&K and others” decided on 12.02.2025, within a stipulated period.

5. Mr. Jeetender Singh, GA and Irshad Ahmad Wani, appeared for Respondents.

6. Heard and considered the material available on record.

7. Perusal of the record reveals that this Court has passed the order in OA No. 592/2023, titled Mehraj-ud-Din and Ors Vs. UT of J&K and Ors, on 27.09.2023, the operative para of which is reproduced as under:-

“So far as the recovery of the excess payment with effect from the date on which the benefit of SRO 59/1990, was granted to the applicants, the respondents cannot resort to such action having regard to the fact that the applicants have already been superannuated. Even it is assumed that the applicants have drawn excess pay, the respondents cannot recover the said amount in view of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the matter of State of Punjab VS Rafiq Masih 2015 (4) SCC 334. It is not a case of the respondents that the applicants had played a fraud or misrepresented before getting the benefit of SRO 59/1990. In such a situation respondents cannot recover the said alleged excess amount paid to them.

In view of above, the respondents are directed not to recover any alleged excess amount paid to the applicants during service period since they have already superan