IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 14/11/2025

C O R A M

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K. SURENDER

Writ Petition No.14238 of 2017

a n d

W.M.P.Nos.15439 and 15440 of 2017

Henry Barnabas Prince … Petitioner

Vs

1. Government of India

rep. By Secretary to Government

Ministry of Home Affairs

North Block, Central Secretariat

New Delhi 110 011.

2. Pay and Accounts Officer (CISF)

Ministry of Home Affairs

5th Floor, E Block, GPO Complex, INA

New Delhi 110 023.

3. Pay and Accounts Officer (CISF) MHA

Block No.13 CGO Complex

Lodhi Road

New Delhi 110 003.

4. Pay and Accounts Officer Central Pension Accounting Office Government of India Trikoot 2, Bhikaji Cama Palace New Delhi 110 066.

5. The Assistant General Manager State Bank of India Centralized Pension Processing Centre

112/4 Kaliamman Koil Street Virugambakkam Chennai 600 092.

6. The Manager State Bank of India Annanagar West Y 211, 11th Avenue, Annanagar Chennai 600 040. … Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a writ of certiorairfied mandamus to call for the entire records relating to the proceedings of the fourth respondent in No.232830100555/1811777/A3 and Dairy No.PR315037390 dated 29/9/2015 and in turn the proceedings of the fifth respondent No.Revision/INW REF/35266 dated 27/10/2015 and 27/4/2016, quash the same and direct the fourth respondent to continue to pay pension as per the order of the respondent dated 2/6/2011 in letter No.232830100555/722539/A1 to the petitioner on the basic pension of Rs.40,000/-.

For petitioner ... Mr.George Graham for M/s.Devadason & Sagar For respondents ... Mr.R.Sanjay Central Government Standing Counsel for R.R.1 to 4 Mr.K.Chandrasekaran for R.R.5 and 6.

- - - - -

O R D E R

This writ petition has been filed to quash the proceedings dated 29/9/2015 issued by the fourth respondent in No.232830100555/1811777/A3 (Dairy No.PR315037390) and proceedings of the fifth respondent dated 27/10/2015 and 27/4/2016 and further, direct the fourth respondent to continue to pay pension, as per the order of the fourth respondent dated 2/6/2011 made in letter No.232830100555/722539/A1 to the petitioner.

2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the petitioner served in the respondent Bank in various capacities and retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation during February 2001. At the time of retirement, Department has taken an undertaking from the petitioner to the effect that ‘if any excess payment is found to be made, the same may be recovered from his pension benefits’. On implementation of VI Pay Commission, the petitioner’s pension was revised at Rs.40,000/- w.e.f 1/1/2006 instead of Rs.23,150/- p.m. From the year 2006 to 2014, according to the respondents, excess payment of Rs.27,84,910/- was paid to the petitioner. Therefore, recovery order dated 27/10/2015 was passed on the ground that excess payment was made and hence, the same has to be recovered in one lump sum. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has come forward with the instant writ petition.

3. Heard Mr.George Graham, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.R.Sanjay, learned Central Government Standing counsel for the respondents 1 to 4 and Mr.K.Chandrasekaran, learned counsel for the respondents 5 and 6. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was not put on notice for recovery of the amount. If at all there was any excess payment made, an opportunity ought to have been given to the petitioner before recovering the amount.

5. The learned Central Government Standing counsel appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 would submit that letter dated 31/12/2014 was sent by State Bank of India, Centralised Pension Processing Centre to the Central Pension Accounting Office, New Delhi wherein, it is stated that due to fixation of pay band, pension has to be reduced to Rs.23,150/- from Rs.24,295/-. A copy of the said letter was marked to the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner cannot plead ignorance of the r