Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Ashok Buchayya Pusalwar, was an Assistant Teacher with the Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli, appointed on 24-10-1996. He voluntarily retired on 30-6-2020 at the age of 59 years. After the 6th Pay Commission, his pay was revised under the Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009. Upon retirement, the respondent No.2 (Chief Audit and Finance Officer) quantified his pension and found that from August 2007 to August 2019, there was an excess payment of Rs.1,39,316/- in his salary. By an order dated 27-10-2020, the respondent sanctioned gratuity of Rs.6,68,575/- but deducted Rs.1,39,316/- as recovery of the excess amount. The petitioner challenged this recovery by filing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the recovery order. The petitioner contended that the excess payment was due to a mistake by the respondents in pay fixation and that he had not misrepresented any facts. The respondents argued that the recovery was justified as the excess payment was made due to an error in pay fixation. The court, relying on the principle that recovery of excess payment from a retired employee is not permissible when the employee had no role in the mistake and had not misrepresented, held that the recovery order was unsustainable. The court noted that the petitioner had retired and the recovery was from his gratuity, which is a retiral benefit. The court directed the respondents to refund the recovered amount of Rs.1,39,316/- to the petitioner within four weeks. The writ petition was allowed, and rule was made absolute.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Recovery of Excess Payment - No Misrepresentation - Recovery of excess salary paid to a retired employee due to a mistake in pay fixation is impermissible when the employee had not misrepresented any facts and the excess payment was made by the employer's own mistake. The court held that recovery from retiral benefits of a retired employee who had no role in the pay fixation is not justified. (Paras 3-8) B) Service Law - Gratuity - Protection of Retiral Benefits - Gratuity is a retiral benefit and cannot be reduced by recovery of excess salary paid due to departmental error. The court directed the respondents to refund the recovered amount of Rs.1,39,316/- to the petitioner within four weeks. (Paras 8-9)
Issue of Consideration
Whether recovery of excess salary paid to a retired employee due to a mistake in pay fixation can be recovered from his retiral benefits when the employee had not misrepresented any facts.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The order dated 27-10-2020 passed by respondent No.2 is quashed and set aside to the extent of recovery of Rs.1,39,316/-. The respondents are directed to refund the said amount to the petitioner within four weeks. Rule is made absolute.
Law Points
- Recovery of excess payment from retired employee
- No misrepresentation by employee
- Departmental error
- No fault of employee
- Recovery from retiral benefits
- Gratuity
- Pay fixation error
- Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules
- 2009
