Jharkhand High Court
Vijay Bahadur Singh vs National Institute Of Foundry And Forge ... on 12 September, 2024
Author: Ambuj Nath
Bench: Ambuj Nath
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No. 3872 of 2019
Vijay Bahadur Singh, son of Late Sitaram Singh, resident of Qr. No.AII
31, Dhurwa, P.O. and P.S.- Dhurwa, District - Ranchi.
... Petitioner
- Versus -
1. National Institute of Foundry and Forge Technology, P.O. and P.S.-
Hatia, District - Ranchi through its Director Office at in the Campus of
National Institute of Foundry and Forge Technology, P.O. and P.S.- Hatia,
District- Ranchi
2. Director, National Institute of Foundry and Forge Technology, P.O. and
P.S.- Hatia, District- Ranchi. ... Respondents
------
CORAM: - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Vijay Bahadur Singh, In person.
For the Respondents : Mr. Ram Lakhan Yadav, Advocate
.............
06/12.09.2024
Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner has filed this writ application for issuance of
direction upon the respondents to refund Rs.22,279/- with interest which
was illegally recovered from the amount of the arrears of pension of the
petitioner that too without hearing and without giving him notice.
3. The petitioner has retired from post of Assistant Registrar in
National Institute of Foundry and Forge Technology on 30.06.2011. The
petitioner during his service period was given Rs.14,200/- as tribal area
allowance which the petitioner was not entitled to get. The petitioner was
also given Rs.5,079/- as medical advance and Rs.3,000/- as expense
advance. In all, Rs.22,279/- were ordered to be recovered by order dated
14.05.2019, the respondents deducted Rs.22,279/- from the arrears of
pension of the petitioner, after nine years of his retirement.
4. Mr. Ram Lakhan Yadav, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
respondents submitted that the petitioner was not entitled for travel
allowance and other allowances which were given to him. It was further
submitted that the aforesaid amount was deducted from his arrears of
pension, in view of communication made to his employer by the Section
Officer, Technical Section-VII, D/o Higher Education, MHRD, New
Delhi.
On perusal of this notification, it appears that direction was given to
the respondents to recover and to take necessary action regarding recovery
of the amount paid as tribal area allowance.
5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab and
Others Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and Others, reported in (2015) 4
SCC 334, specifically has held in paragraph-18 that
"18. It is not possible to postulate all situations of hardship, which
would govern employees on the issue of recovery, where payments have
mistakenly been made by the employer, in excess of their entitlement. Be
that as it may, based on the decisions referred to herein above, we may, as a
ready reference, summarise the following few situations, wherein recoveries
by the employers, would be impermissible in law:
(i) Recovery from employees belonging to Class-III and Class-IV
service (or Group 'C' and Group 'D' service).
(ii) Recovery from retired employees, or employees who are due to
retire within one year, of the order of recovery.
(iii) Recovery from employees, when the excess payment has been
made for a period in excess of five years, before the order of recovery is
issued.
(iv) Recovery in cases where an employee has wrongfully been
required to discharge duties of a higher post, and has been paid
accordingly, even though he should have rightfully been required to work
against an inferior post.
(v) In any other case, where the Court arrives at the conclusion, that
recovery if made from the employee, would be iniquitous or harsh or
arbitrary to such an extent, as would far outweigh the equitable balance of
the employer's right to recover."
6. In the present case, the order for recovery of excess amount paid to
the petitioner was passed after nine years of his retirement. In the light of
the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of
Punjab and Others Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and Others
(Supra), the order of recovery made from the arrears of pension from the
informant after nine years of his retirement is very harsh and arbitrary in
nature. The respondents can not recover the said amount which has been
paid in excess to the petitioner due to no laches on his part.
7. This writ application is allowed. The respondents are directed to
release Rs.22,279/- in favour of the petitioner with immediate effect.
8. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of.
(Ambuj Nath, J.)
Jay/-
