SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 1972

PATNA HIGH COURT
HARISH KUMAR, J
Ashok Kumar Tiwary – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Bihar – Respondent
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.17436 of 2023



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh
For the Respondents: Mr. Ajay Bihari Sinha, GA-8, Ms. Seema Ghazala, AC to GA-8, Mr. Piyus Lall

Recovery from retired employees is impermissible when excess payments were made without misrepresentation, as per established legal precedents.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Recovery of excess payment - Petitioners, retired Class-III employees, challenge recovery orders issued for excess amounts drawn from unutilized earned leave, amounting to Rs. 3,35,165/- and Rs. 4,45,975/- - Supreme Court precedent dictates that recovery from retired employees is impermissible in certain situations, including excess payments made without misrepresentation or fraud (Paras 8, 19, 28).

(B) Recovery from retiral benefits - The court emphasized that recovery from employees who have retired or are due to retire within a year is iniquitous, especially when the excess payment was made due to incorrect fixation of pay and without malfeasance (Paras 19, 27).

(C) Discrimination in recovery - The court noted that the impugned recovery orders created an arbitrary distinction between employees who retired before and after a specific government letter, leading to an unequal application of the law (Paras 27, 28).

Facts of the case:
Petitioners are retired employees who claim recovery orders for excess payment are unjust and violate their rights, referencing previous court decisions that support their position.

Findings of Court:
The court quashed the recovery orders, directing refund of amounts recovered, citing iniquity and discrimination in the application of recovery rules.

Issues: The main issues include the legality of recovery from retired employees and whether the recovery orders violate established legal precedents.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that recovery from retired employees is impermissible under specific circumstances, particularly when it leads to undue hardship and is not based on fraud or misrepresentation.

Result: Writ petition allowed; recovery orders quashed, with directions for refund.

Table of Content
1. petitioners challenge recovery of excess payment from retirement benefits. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
2. petitioners argue recovery violates supreme court mandate. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
3. respondents assert recovery is valid due to undertakings. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)
4. court reviews relevant communications regarding recovery. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18)
5. court cites supreme court guidelines on recovery from employees. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23)
6. court finds discriminatory recovery practices unjust. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27)
7. court quashes recovery orders and allows petition. (Para 28 , 29 , 30)

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 10-09-2024

This Court has heard Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, learned Advocate for the petitioners, Mr. Piyus Lall, learned Advocate for the respondent nos. 3 to 6 and Ms. Seema Ghazala, learned Advocate for the State.

2. The petitioners are retired Class-III employees of the judgeship of Patna, superannuated from the post of Sheristedars have preferred the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of the order of recovery of excess amount drawn from the amount of unutilized earned leave of the petitioners amounting to Rs. 3,35,165/- and Rs. 4,45,975/- issued under the signature of District and Sessions Judge, Patna vide Sanction order dated 20.07.2021 and 16.09.2021 respectively.

3. Bereft of immaterial details, the relevant facts of the case are that petitioner no.1 was appointed as a clerk on 08.12.1979 and superannuated on 31.01.2021 while working on the post of Sheristedar from Civil Court, Patna. Similarly petitioner no.2 appointed on 19.05.1981 as Clerk and superannuated on 20.03.2020 while working on the post of Sheristedar from Civil Court, Patna City, Patna.

4. Initially vide Order No. 29/2006 dated 26.08.2006, the petitioners were granted the benefits of 1st and 2nd financial up-gradation under the A.C.P. Scheme in the pay scale of Rs.5000-8000/- and Rs.5500-9000/-. Subsequently, vide Order no. 47/2012 dated 02.03.2012, the Class-III employees of the judgeship were granted the benefit of 3rd Financial up- gradation under the MACP scheme in the pay scale of Pay Band 2 Rs.9300-34800/- with Grade Pay of Rs.4800/-. Thereafter by Order No. 121/2013 dated 24.08.2013 issued by the District and Sessions Judge, Patna, the employees who have not been accorded the 3rd A.C.P. were allowed higher pay scale of Pay Band 3 Rs.15600-39100/- with Grade Pay Rs.6600/-. However, vide Order No. 145/2013 dated 16.11.2013, the aforenoted Order No. 121/2013 dated 24.08.2013 was cancelled awaiting the opinion of the Law Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

5. Being aggrieved, the Bihar State Civil Court Employees Association made a representation before the concerned respondents as also in view of the report dated 23.02.2016 of the Screening Committee of the Judgeship of Patna vide Order No. 55/2016 dated 24.02.2016, the cancellation Order No. 145/2013 dated 16.11.2013 was rescinded and earlier Order No. 121/2013 dated 24.08.2013 granting higher pay scale of 3rd ACP in Pay Band 3 Rs.15600- 39100/- with Grade Pay Rs.6600/- was restored; but with a caveat that, if in future, it was found that excess amount was received by any employee it shall be recovered from them and they shall file their respective affidavits for refund of excess amount. Pursuant thereto the petitioners filed their respective affidavits dated 10.03.2016 and 17.03.2016 respectively to the effect that excess amount is drawn by them, then it would be recovered from them.

6. In the meanwhile, the Law Department, Government of Bihar, Patna came out with letter no. 3153 dated 10.04.2018 informing all the judgeship of the State that with regard to grant of benefit of ACP scheme to Class-III employees of Civil Courts of the State, the Finance Department, Government of Bihar, Patna has reiterated its opinion that 3rd financial upgradation would be granted in the pay scale of PB3 with grade pay of Rs.5400/-. It was fur

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