The recovery of excess salary payments must adhere to regulatory frameworks and principles of natural justice; undue hardship on the employee must be avoided.

ORDER

PER: HON’BLE MR. VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER

1. As the applicant in both the OAs is the same, the two OAs have been taken up together for consideration and passing a common order. With the consent of both the parties, Original Application No.785/2017 is being treated as the lead case.

2. The relief sought by the applicant, in OA.No.785 of 2017, is as follows:

(i) To declare the Letter No.SPP/HR/2017-18/Ex.IO-Vig/6^th CPC/1667 dated 18.7.2017 of Respondent No.5 conveying to Respondent No.6 the decision to recover alleged excess payment made to the applicant by way of increment at 4% and consequential further letter No.SPP/HR/Vigilance/Ex.V.O./ 2016-17/2164 dated 16.8.2017 of R-5 requesting R6 to recover Rs.13,980/- from the applicant and remit the said amount to SSP Hyderabad, as arbitrary, illegal and violative of principles of natural justice and set aside the same.

(ii) To declare that sanction of 4% higher rate of increment to the applicant from 1.7.2009 by the then competent authority viz., the Dy.General Manager & Head of the Department of SPP, Hyderabad was as per Rule 9 of CCS (RP) Rules, 2008 and hence the applicant is entitled to retain the benefits accrued on account thereof during the period of his deputation with R-4 office.

(iii) Awarding costs to the applicant.

And/or pass such other order or orders as deemed fit and proper by this Hon’ble Tribunal in the circumstances of the case.

3. The relief sought in OA.No.58 of 2017, is as follows:

(i) To declare the Office Order No.E/381/2016 bearing endorsement No.7/PF(Mum)/2011(7)-2826 dated 22.11.2016 passed by Respondent No.4 re-fixing applicant’s pay as on 3.10.2011 by notionally calculating his last pay drawn on repatriation from deputation as Rs.22910/- plus Rs.5400/- GP instead of Rs.23190/- plus Rs.5400/- GP, the pay actually drawn by the applicant, and consequential re-fixation of his pay on promotion as Assistant Director on 3.10.2011 at Rs.23700/- plus Rs.6600/- GP, as arbitrary, without any authority and illegal and violative of articles 14, 16, 1 and 300-A of the Constitution of India and set aside the same.

(ii) To declare that the consequential Office Order No.13/2017 bearing endorsement No.5/Est(PF)/2014(2)-71 dated 11.1.2017 passed by Respondent No.5 and further Memo No.Hyd-012/26(Misc)/2015-16-59 dated 18.1.2017 issued by Respondent No.6 ordering for recovery of alleged excess payment made to the applicant, are arbitrary and illegal and set aside the same.

(iii) To declare that the applicant is entitled to retain the benefits accrued on account of variable rate of increment at 4% granted to him by Respondent No.7 as on 1.7.2009 on permanent basis throughout his service.

(iv) To consequently direct the Respondent No4 to treat his pay on repatriation from deputation as on 3.10.2011 as Rs.23,190/- plus Rs.5,400/- Grade Pay and to re-fix his pay on promotion as Assistant Director on 3.10.2011 at appropriate place.

(v) To further direct the Respondent