Telangana High Court
D. Bakkaiah Shastry vs The Principal Secretary And 3 Others on 25 July, 2024
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T. MADHAVI DEVI
WRIT PETITION (T.R) No.89 of 2017
ORDER:
In this Writ Petition, the petitioner is seeking a declaration
(i) that the petitioner is entitled to get his pension fixed on the basic of Rs.36,700/- and is entitled to be paid gratuity on the said basis of Rs.36,700/- which he was drawing as on the date of his retirement i.e. 28.02.2010;
(ii) that the pension payment made on the basis of the revised LPC whereby and whereunder, his basic was shown as Rs.34,900/- as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 16, 21 and 300A of Constitution of India;
(iii) that the recovery of Rs.74,968/- made from the gratuity of the petitioner is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional; and
(iv) to pass such other order or orders. 2
2. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition are that the petitioner retired from service as Language Pandit Grade-II on 28.02.2010. During his service, the petitioner's pay was fixed under the Automatic Advancement Scheme under 8, 16 and 24 years scales and the petitioner submitted his pension papers, which were forwarded on 01.08.2010 to the Accountant General, A&E, A.P., Hyderabad. Service pension of Rs.36,700/- was recommended and all the consequential benefits were also computed accordingly. However, the office of the Accountant General, returned the proposals sent by the Head Master, by observing that the pay has to be refixed and the excess of pay and allowances from 01.02.2005 to 30.04.2010 paid have to be worked out. Accordingly, the petitioner was required to submit another set of pension papers making a different calculations based on another LPC. As per the revised order, the petitioner's basic pay was shown as Rs.34,900/- as against the basic 3 pay drawn was Rs.36,700/-. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed O.A.No.7646 of 2012 before the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal and on abolition of the Tribunal, the same has been transfered to this Court and numbered as W.P.(T.R).No.89 of 2017.
3. The respondents have filed counter affidavit and on 27.09.2012, the Tribunal had passed the interim stay of recovery of the amount of Rs.74,968/- from the gratuity of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that similar issues have already been adjudicated by this Court in a number of cases and in W.P.No.15524 of 2017, after considering the issue at length, this Court has observed as follows:
"5. Taking into consideration the Full Bench judgment in State Language Teachers' Association, represented by its State General Secretary, Palla Sathaiah and others v State of Andhra Pradesh, represented by its Secretary to Government, Legislative Affairs and Justice, Hyderabad and others, the Apex Court judgment in State of Punjab 4 and others v Rafiq Masih (White Washer) (2014)8 SCC 833 and also the view taken by the Division Bench of the High Court of Telangana at Hyderabad passed in W.P.No.32896 and 33790 of 2013, dated 24.02.2022 and also the Division Bench Judgment dated 24.02.2022 passed in W.P.No.21866, 26512 and 26521 of 2021 and the law laid by the various Apex Court judgments, referred to and discussed in detail in order dated 17.08.2022 passed in W.P.No.24687 of 2013, this Court finds that the alleged excess payments made to the petitioners is not on account of any fault on their part and in view of the law laid down in the various judgments no recovery can be made.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is allowed directing the respondents to pay the respective amounts recovered from the petitioners on proper acknowledgment, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Registry is directed to enclose copy of order dated 17.08.2022 passed in W.P.No.24687 of 2013 along with this writ petition. There shall be no order as to costs."
5. Learned Government Pleader for the respondents is also heard.
6. After going through the entire record and also the decision of this Court in W.P.No.15524 of 2017, this Court finds that the issue is covered by the 5 decision of this Court in the said case and the recovery of the sum of Rs.74,968/-, if already made, shall be repaid to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed.
____________________________ JUSTICE T.MADHAVI DEVI Date:25.07.2024 TU