(Open Court)

Central Administrative Tribunal Allahabad Bench, Allahabad ****

Original Application No. 1484 of 2016 This the 06^th Day of April, 2026.

HON’BLE MR. RAJNISH KUMAR RAI, MEMBER-J.

HON’BLE MS. MANJU PANDEY, MEMBER-A.

T. R. Kesarwani Son of Shri Newa Lal Kesarwani Resident of 35B/13/1 Friends Colony, Indalpur Road Naini, Allahabad

211007.

….Applicant.

By Advocate: Mr. B.D. Shukla.

Versus

1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited through its Chief Manager/Director Bharat Sanchar Bhawan, H. Lane Janpath New Delhi.

2. General Manager Telecom Bharat Door Sanchar Nawab Yusuf Road Civil Lines, Allahabad.

3. Assistant General Manager (Administrative) Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited Allahabad.

4. Senior Account Officer Phone(Cash) Office of General Manager Telecom Department Allahabad.

5. Director/Controller of Communication Accounts U.P.

East, Gomti Nagar Telephone Exchanges Lucknow.

...Respondents.

By Advocate: Mr. D.S. Shukla.

ORDER By Hon’ble Mr. Rajnish Kumar Rai, Member (Judicial)

Mr. B.D. Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. D.S. Shukla, learned counsel for the respondents are present and heard.

2. The instant original application has been filed seeking following reliefs: -

“(A) To quash order dated 27.09.2016 passed respondent No. 5 (Deputy C.C.C.) (Pension) Controller of communication Account U.P. East Gomti Nagar Lucknow Telephone Exchange Lucknow.

(B) Direct to respondents to pay the bill pension to the applicant on the basis of last drawn of Basic Salary Rs. 10950/-.

(C) Direct to respondents for payment of Rs. 40910/-

alongwith 18% compound interest.”

3. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was initially appointed in the Telephone Department as a Time Scale Clerk and was subsequently promoted to the post of Telecom Office Assistant, and after rendering long years of service, he retired on 30.11.2006 from the post of Senior Telecom Office Assistant from the office of General Manager, Telecommunication District, Allahabad, with last drawn pay of Rs. 10,950/-. After his superannuation, the respondents took a plea that excess payment had been made to the applicant and, in pursuance of order dated 08.02.2007 issued by the office of GMTD, BSNL, Allahabad, his pay was revised and reduced to Rs. 10,725/-, and recovery was directed on account of alleged overpayment of pay and allowances amounting to Rs. 37,205/- and leave encashment of Rs. 3,710/-, totaling Rs. 40,915/-, from his retiral dues, particularly from Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity, without affording proper opportunity of hearing. The applicant made several representations against such recovery and reduction of pension, contending that the pay fixation had been done by the department itself and that there was no misrepresentation or fault on his part, but the same were not duly considered. Aggrieved thereby, the applicant has filed the present Original Application seeking quashing of the impugned orders, refund of the recovered amount with interest, and fixation of pension on the basis of his last drawn pay.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant assailing the impugned order dated 27.09.2016 submitted that the respondents have illegally ordered recovery of Rs. 40,915/- from the Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity of the applicant and have wrongly fixed his pension on the basis of reduced pay of Rs. 10,725/- instead of his last drawn pay of Rs. 10,950/-. Drawing attention to the Last Pay Certificate dated 21.12.2006, learned counsel submitted that the applicant’s basic pay was duly recorded as Rs. 10,950/-, which was subsequently altered by the respondents vide order dated 17.02.2007 without any fault attributable to the applicant. It was contended that such recovery after retirement, particularly from retiral dues, is impermissible, especially when the excess payment, if any, was made by the department itself and not on account of any misrepresentation or fraud on the part of the applicant. It was, thus, argued that the impugned recovery and reduction in pension are liable to be set