Asha Devi vs Managing Director, S.B.I
2023 Latest Caselaw 3776 Patna

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                  Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15611 of 2019
     ======================================================

Asha Devi, Wife of Late Surendra Prasad Singh, Resident of Village- Sarathua House, Behind Pokhraj Lodge Anaith, P.S. Ara, Nawada, Distt.- Bhojpur.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. Managing Director, S.B.I. (Net Work-1) Local Head Branch West Gandhi Maidan, Patna 800001.

2. Assistant Managing Director 4th Floor Administrative officer, Judges Court Road, Patna.

3. Manager State Bank of India, Ara Branch, Jail Road, Ara.

4. The District Magistrate, Bhojpur at Ara.

5. The District Programme Officer (Establishment), Bhojpur at Ara.

6. The Principle Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Anaith, Ara.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nadim Seraj, Sr. Advocate. For the Bank : Mrs. Namrata Mishra, Sr. Advocate.

Ms. Archana Jha, Advocate.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 17-08-2023 Heard Mr. Nadim Seraj, learned counsel appearing

on behalf of the petitioner and Mrs. Namrata Mishra, learned

senior counsel along with Ms. Archana Jha, learned counsel for

the State Bank of India.

2. Vide order dated 08.08.2023, this Court had

directed the District Programme Officer (Establishment),

Bhojpur at Ara to clarify as to whether any communication was

made to the Accountant General in light of the Circular

contained in Memo No. 9505 dated 03.09.1964 for reducing Patna High Court CWJC No.15611 of 2019 dt.17-08-2023

30% pension. In compliance of the direction of this Court, a

supplementary counter affidavit has been filed by the

respondent no.5 - District Programme Officer, Bhojpur at Ara in

which a communication made by the Accountant General, Bihar

to the Treasury Officer, Ara has been brought on record

directing him to credit family pension into the account of the

petitioner at a reduced rate in terms of the Finance Department

Circular contained in Memo No. 9505 dated 03.09.1964. In

Para-7 of the supplementary counter affidavit, a vague statement

has been made that the concerned Bank or the Treasury Officer

has to compute the family pension of the petitioner in light of

the Circular of the Finance Department. From the records which

have been brought on record by way of supplementary counter

affidavit and the statement made in Paragraph No.7, it appears

that the Treasury Officer, Bhojpur at Ara was required to direct

the Bank to credit the family pension after reducing 30% from

the pension in light of the Circular contained in Memo No. 9505

dated 03.09.1964. The counter affidavit has been filed on behalf

of respondent nos. 1 to 4 - State Bank of India and in Paragraph

Nos. 4, 5 and 6, they have not denied with respect to recovery of

excess amount from the pension of the petitioner.

3. Considering the statement made in the counter Patna High Court CWJC No.15611 of 2019 dt.17-08-2023

affidavit filed on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 4 and counter

affidavit and supplementary counter affidavit filed on behalf of

respondent no.5, this Court finds that petitioner is not at fault in

any manner so far as pension has been credited into her account.

Petitioner is a widow and her husband has retired from the post

of Assistant Teacher which is a Class-III post. The law with

respect to recovery is well settled by the Apex Court in the case

of State of Punjab and Others Vs. Rafiq Masih (White

Washer) reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334 and in the case of

Thomas Daniel Vs. State of Kerala reported in 2022 SCC

OnLine SC 536. The respondents-State are under obligation to

inform the Bank about the above circular for deciding the

pension. However, after giving 20% extra pension into the

account of the petitioner for the period from 09.07.2011 to

31.12.2017, the recovery of the family pension which has

already been granted to the petitioner will cause great hardship

to the petitioner. Several circulars of the Reserve Bank of India

is also clear in this regard.

4. The Additional Chief Secretary, Education

Department, Bihar is directed to take a final decision in light of

the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Rafiq Masih

(supra) and Thomas Daniel (supra) considering the fact that Patna High Court CWJC No.15611 of 2019 dt.17-08-2023

the Stat Government has entered into an agreement with the

State Bank of India to disburse the pension into the account of

the pensioners and for any incorrect / wrong committed by the

officials of the Bank, petitioner should not suffer.

5. With the above observations and directions, the

writ petition is disposed of.

(Purnendu Singh, J)

mantreshwar/-

AFR/NAFR                N.A.F.R.
CAV DATE                N.A.
Uploading Date          22.08.2023
Transmission Date       N.A.