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

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 3

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Kiran Shukla – Appellant
Versus
Kendriya Vidyalaya Sanghthan – Respondent
O.A./808/2018



(Reserved on 27.11.2025)

Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad This the _01st day of January, 2026 Hon’ble Mr. Rajnish Kumar Rai, Member (J)

Original Application No. 808 of 2018 Kiran Shukla d/o Late Jwala Prasad Shukla H.No.174-B/225 New Mehdauri, Teliarganj District:- Allahabad.

……….. Applicant.

By Advocate: Mr. Rajesh Kumar Srivastava.

Versus

1. Deleted.

2. The Deputy Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan(KVS) Regional Office(RO), Banaras Hindu University (BHU) Campus, Varanasi-221005.

3. The Finance Officer, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan(KVS) Regional Office(RO), Banaras Hindu University(BHU) Campus, Varanasi-221005.

4. The Principal, Kendriya Vidyalaya, New Cantt, Allahabad 211001.

……….. Respondents By Advocate: Mr. D.P. Singh.

Order Mr. Rajesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. D.P. Singh, learned counsel for the respondents are present and heard.

2. The applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking redressal against the deduction of ₹1,22,946/- from her gratuity amount on account of alleged wrong re-fixation of pay. Accordingly, the instant Original Application has been filed seeking the following reliefs: -

“I. Call for the records of this case.

II. Issue any order, direction quashing the Impugned Order dt. 31.12.2015 passed by the Respondent No.2(Annexure No.A-2 to the Compilation No.I) Memorandum dt. 12.02.2016 affirming the Office Order/Impugned Order dt. 31.12.2015 passed by the Respondent No.2 (AnnexureNo.A-3 to the Compilation No.I) other consequential Order dt. 16.02.2016 passed by the Respondent No. 4 (AnnexureNo.A-5 to Compilation No.I) by means of the same authorities have deducted a Sum of Rs. 1,22,946 in the name of alleged wrong re-fixation of pay scale due on promotion to the Post of TGT(BIO)(Date of Promotion 21.05.2008) from the Total sum of Rs.9,21081 as was due as Gratuity Amount by virtue of Superannuation from Service as on 31st Dec. 2015.

III. Issue any order, direction commanding the Respondents to refund the amount of a Sum of Rs. 1,22,946 with interest as has been deducted in the name of recovery in the name of alleged wrong re-fixation of pay scale due on promotion to the Post of TGT(BIO) (Date of Promotion 21.05 2008) from the Total sum of Rs.9,21081 as was due as Gratuity Amount by virtue of Superannuation from Service as on 31st Dec.2015.

IV. Issue any order, direction commanding the Respondents to pay a total sum of Rs. 2000x15=Rs.30000in lieu of 15 days Earned Leave @ Rs.2000 per Earned Leave as have been adjusted from Applicant's Earned Leave.

V. Issue any other order or direction which this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit & proper in the facts &

Circumstances of the case.

VI. Award the cost of this Original Application against the Respondents.”

3. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant, Smt. Kiran Shukla, was initially appointed as Primary Teacher on 29.11.1982 and later promoted as TGT (Biology) on 21.05.2008. Her pay was duly fixed by the competent authority vide order dated 02/03.04.2012 granting her pay band of ₹9300-34800 with grade pay ₹4800. On superannuation dated 31.12.2015, however, the Finance Officer, KVS, Varanasi, passed an impugned order dated 31.12.2015 re-fixing her pay retrospectively and reducing the basic from ₹16540 to ₹15910, terming earlier fixation as erroneous. Consequential orders dated 10.02.2016 and 12.02.2016 directed recovery of ₹1,22,946/- from her gratuity of ₹9,21,081/-, resulting in actual payment of only ₹7,98,135/-. Being aggrieved of such deduction and recovery, the applicant has filed the present OA.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the impugned orders were passed on the very date of superannuation without issuing any show cause notice or affording opportunity of hearing, thereby violating principles of natural justice. It was urged that the applicant had no role in pay fixation, which was done by the competent authority, and hence

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