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) 4647

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Narendra Kumar Johari, Member (J), Kumar Rajesh Chandra, Member (A)
Baleshwar Prasad Sahu – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
OA/051/00537/2023



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Birendra Kumar
For the Respondents: Shrestha Mehta

An administrative authority has the inherent right to revise a government servant's pay and pension based on audit findings under the CSS (Pension) Rules, provided that any resultant adjustments to salary prior to final settlement are not characterized as prohibited arbitrary recoveries.

Headnote:(A) Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2021 - Rule 66 - Revision of pension - Pension once authorised can be revised if a clerical error is detected, provided that no revision to the disadvantage of the pensioner shall be made after a period of two years from the date of authorisation.

(B) Recovery of excess payment - Group C and D employees - Applicability of Rafiq Masih principles - Administrative authorities have the right to regularize pay scales based on audits, provided the recovery process is not iniquitous, harsh, or arbitrary; mere regularization of pay prior to final retirement settlement is permissible. (Para 6)

Facts of the case:
The applicant, a retired Group C employee of the Military Engineer Service, challenged the unilateral re-fixation of his pay scale after his retirement, which resulted in reduced leave encashment and withheld salary. The applicant contended that the re-fixation without show cause notice and the resulting recovery were illegal and violated Supreme Court guidelines.

Findings of Court:
The Tribunal examined the pay fixation and the leave encashment calculations. It found that the respondents had only regularized the pay under the audit authority's direction and had not initiated recovery from the terminal benefits. The Tribunal upheld the administrative authority's right to revise pension and pay based on audit findings under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021.

Issues: Whether the unilateral re-fixation of pay after retirement without prior notice is illegal, and whether the consequent reduction in leave encashment and salary constitutes an impermissible recovery from a Group C employee.

Ratio Decidendi: The administrative department has the authority to correct clerical errors and re-fix pay based on audit findings, provided such re-fixation occurs within the legal framework prescribed by the CCS (Pension) Rules. Regularization of pay does not equate to prohibited recovery of terminal benefits as envisioned in the Rafiq Masih ruling.

Result: OA dismissed.

Table of Content
1. summary of facts and grievances regarding post-retirement pay re-fixation. (Para 1 , 2)
2. parties' contentions regarding audit-based pay regularization versus protection against recovery. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. court's interpretation of ccs(pension) rules regarding the authority to correct clerical errors. (Para 6 , 7 , 8)

O R D E R

Per: Kumar Rajesh Chandra, Administrative Member:-

This OA has been filed by the applicant seeking the following relief:-

(i) For quashing the order dated 17.04.2023 (Annexure-8) whereby pay scale of the applicant has been re-fixed after retirement unilaterally without any show cause and hearing when there is no misrepresentation or fraud play by the applicant to the Department.

(ii) For restraining the respondents for recoveries of salaries excess drawn if any after re-fixation of pay scale from retired employee, i.e. applicant and not to alter pension of the applicant as paid by the department.

(iii) For payment of leave encashment with interest which was erroneously withheld by the department after determined in favour of the applicant.

(iv) For payment of salary of January, 2022 with interest 12% thereon when applicant was superannuated from service on 31.01.2022.

(v) Be further pleased to pass any such other order(s), direction(s) as Your Honour may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice to the applicant.”

2. For the sake of clarity, the brief facts of the case, as stated by the applicant, is being discussed and delineated as under:-

(i) The applicant was appointed on 23.02.1981 under respondent no. 5 having the qualification of matriculation on the Grade-D post as Majdoor and thereafter became the Painter (Group C) in H.S-II category. After introduction of ACP and MACP in view of the 5th Central Pay Commission Report, the pay scale of the applicant was re-fixed in the scale of Rs. 9010 + 2000/- one additional increment after second financial upgradation under MACP to senior matriculate erstwhile group-D employee in the scale of pay PB-1 Rs. 5200-20200 + 2000/- GP with DNI 01.07.2009 in view of letter dated 26.10.2012 by AO GE Ranchi. He was also granted additional Annual Increments as per audit on 01.07.2009, 01.07.2010 and 01.07.2011 and was also granted G.P. Rs. 2400/- under pay fixation of the 3rd MACP as per AG letter dated 09.07.2012. All the pay fixation orders are enclosed at Annexure-1 Series to this OA.

(ii) It is stated that Military Engineering Service commonly known as M.E.S. is providing Infrastructure to Armed Force. The applicant being the personnel of M.E.S. possessed all the necessary criteria and tests for the purpose of grant of Central Pay Commission scale and also grant of ACP and MACP after completion of the active service of 12/24 years. Thus the applicant had supplied a list contained in order no. 1 dated 04.01.2021 and mentioned that the post of the applicant as painter H.S.-II with effective date i.e. 28.12.2019 consequent on promotion from Painter H.S.-II to Painter H.S.-1 w.e.f. 28.12.2019 in the scale of pay matrix Level 5 as per 7th CPC and placed in position "in Situ" in the interest of state. This was as per letter dated 16.12.2020 issued by respondent no 4. It is contended that the applicant has not misrepresented or played fraud with the department in getting the promotion in Painter H.S.-I and retired from the service on 31.01.2022.

(iii) The applicant has further provided an extract copy of letter dated 07.02.2022 (Annexure-A/4) mentioning therein that he retired from the post of Painter H.S.-1 on 31.01.2022 on attaining the age of 60 years and placed on pension establishment list w.e.f. 01.02.2022 with the name of the kin-Smt. Renuka Sahu with the home address.

(iv) The applicant has referred to Department of Personnel, Public Grievance and Pensions, Department of Personnel & Training OM dated 3rd October, 2022 on the subject matter of recovery of wrongful/excess payment made to Government Servants and after discussing about the decis

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