Santosh Kumar vs Managing Director, Uttar Pradesh ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 3424 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 36
 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2734 of 2022
 
Petitioner :- Santosh Kumar
 
Respondent :- Managing Director, Uttar Pradesh Jal Nigam (Urban) And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Subodh Kumar Rai
 
Counsel for Respondent :- Suresh Singh,Harsh Vardhan Gupta
 

 
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Harsh Vardhan Gupta, learned counsel for respondents.

Present petition has been filed seeking quashing of impugned recovery order dated 30.12.2019 passed by Assistant Account Officer (Pension), U.P. Jal Nigam, Lucknow, by which, Rs. 1,37,300/- has been recovered/deducted from the gratuity of petitioner.

On the basis of short counter affidavit, Sri Harsh Vardhan Gupta submitted that amount in dispute has already been paid to the petitioner on 05.11.2022, therefore, this petition may be dismissed as infructuous.

Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that as the respondent-authorities has detained gratuity amount, therefore, petitioner is entitled for interest also, upon which, Sri Harsh Vardhan Gupta submitted that in fact the amount so deducted was not the gratuity amount, but it was extra amount, which has been paid to the petitioner due to incorrect fixation of pay scale. He further submitted that now the petitioner is seeking interest on the said amount, for which he is not entitled. In support of his contention, he has placed reliance upon the judgment of Apex Court in the matter of State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih: 2015 (4) SCC 334, in which there is no recital that in case of refund of excess amount paid to the petitioner, he is entitled for interest.

I have considered submissions made by counsel for parties and perused the records as well as judgment cited above.

There is no dispute on this point that petitioner was paid extra amount due to incorrect fixation of pay scale, which has already been refunded to him and now he is claiming for interest upon the said extra amount, which is not permissible under the rules as well as law laid down by the Apex Court in State of Punjab (Supra), therefore, prayer for payment of interest is hereby rejected.

With the aforesaid observations, writ petition is disposed of.

Order Date :- 2.2.2023/Sartaj