Smt. Pushpa Devi vs State Of U P And 3 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 19585 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 34
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14267 of 2022
 

 
Petitioner :- Smt. Pushpa Devi
 
Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Rajeev Nayan Singh, Amit Goel
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C
 

 
Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

Heard Sri Amit Goel, the counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel.

The contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that the husband of the petitioner died on 26.12.2019 and subsequent to his death, the petitioner was paid the family pension in terms of the PPO dated 24.11.2020 (Annexure no.6), however, for the same an order was passed for recovering the amount of Rs.6,44,481/- allegedly paid in excess wherein it was recorded that an amount of Rs.1,08,810/- has been paid in excess on account of gratuity and further it was recorded that an amount of Rs.6,44,481/- is to be recovered from the dues of the petitioner's husband. The petitioner has challenged the direction of the said amount on the ground that no amount could be directed to be recovered/adjusted after the retirement of the deceased employee.

He places reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) reported at (2015) 4 SCC 334 wherein it has held that no recovery can be made from the retrial dues of the petitioner, even if the excess amount is paid without any fault on the part of the employee.

The Standing Counsel has obtained instructions and on the basis of the said instructions, he states that the amount in excess is sought to be recovered as there was wrong fixation of salary of the deceased employee.

Considering the instructions and the stand taken by the State that the recovery was in pursuance to the order of the excess payment of salary, which cannot be attributed to the petitioner, the case is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rafiq Masih (supra), as such, the writ petition is liable to be allowed.

Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order directing for recovery of amount of Rs.6,44,481/- sought to be adjusted is set aside. It is directed that the petitioner shall be paid the family pension to which she is entitled. To further clarify, there shall be no adjustment of the amount allegedly paid in excess on account of wrong calculation of salary.

Order Date :- 2.12.2022

VNP/-