Recovery of overpayment or reduction of pay from a retired government servant without providing a prior show-cause notice violates the principles of natural justice, as such actions result in adverse civil consequences.

WRIT PETITION NO. 23494 OF 2023 (S-CAT)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER OR DIRECTION AND QUASH THE ORDER DATED 11.07.2023 PASSED BY THE CAT IN OA/170/01287/2019, ANNEXURE-A AND ALLOW THE OA/170/01287/2019 GRANTING THE RELIEF TO THE PETITIONER AS PRAYED FOR AND PASS SUCH OTHER ORDER DEEMED FIT HAVING REGARD TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ETC.,

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN ‘B’ GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT

and

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH RAI K

ORAL ORDER

(PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G.PANDIT)

The petitioner, an unsuccessful applicant before the Central Administrative Tribunal at Bengaluru (for short “CAT”) is before this Court, questioning the order dated 11.07.2023 in OA/170/01287/2019, wherein petitioner’s request to restore the last pay drawn at Rs.66,000/- p.m., and consequential re-fixation of pension and other benefits and to refund the recovered amount of Rs.2,87,845/-, is rejected.

2. The brief facts of the case are that:

The petitioner who was working as Senior Accountant in the second respondent-Department retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.05.2018. It is the case of the petitioner that as on the date of retirement, his last pay drawn was Rs.66,000/- p.m. However, it is submitted that by notification dated 08.06.2018 (Annexure-A2), sanction was accorded for payment of Rs.10,98,141/- being retirement gratuity payable on superannuation and the said communication would also indicate recovery of a sum of Rs.1,40,000/- dues to the Credit Co-operative Society as well as Rs.2,87,845/- towards over payment of pay and allowances.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner Sri.Radhakrishna Holla would submit that from the retirement gratuity, a sum of Rs.2,87,845/- was deducted stating that the same is over payment of salary and allowances. Further, he would submit that the last pay drawn by the petitioner at Rs.66,000/-p.m., was reduced to Rs.62,200/- p.m. stating that he was drawing pay of Rs.66,000/- p.m., which he was not entitled to, in view of wrong sanction of MACP-2 and MACP-3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner was entitled for MACP-2 and MACP-3 during his service and if a notice was issued to him prior to recovery, he would have justified the sanction of MACP-2 and MACP-3. However, he submits that without notice, pay of the petitioner was reduced as well as without any show-cause notice, a sum of Rs.2,87,845/- was deducted from his retirement gratuity. Learned counsel would submit that the CAT proceeded to dismiss the application of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has taken undue benefit of his position and he got himself sanctioned MACP-2 and MACP-3. Further, the CAT observed that dues to the Government could be recovered under Rule 71 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1971 (for short “1971 Rules”). Questioning the order of the CAT as well as recovery made along with reduction in pay, petitioner is before this Court.

4. On behalf of the respondents, statement of objections is filed contending that the respondent was working as Superintendent in the Establishment Section and he was dealing with sanction of MACP. It is further contended by the respondents that the petitioner was fully aware that his request for grant of MACP-2 and MACP-3 benefits was rejected earlier and suppressing the earlier rejection of his request to grant MACPs, he made one more representation and he