Search Results for "recovery after retirement"

544 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 544 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court Allows Writ Petition Quashing Orders Treating Termination Period as Break in Service and Recovery of Excess Amount from Pensionary Benefits. Reinstatement Without Back Wages Does Not Imply Break in Service, and Recovery from Retired Employee is Impermissible Under Supreme Court Guidelines.

The dispute arose from a writ petition filed by a former driver employed by the Zilla Parishad, Kolhapur, challenging orders that declared his termina...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Retired Employee's Challenge to Recovery of Excess Pension Paid Due to Mistaken Inclusion of Promotional Increment. Recovery of excess payment after six years of retirement held impermissible as per principles against recovery from retired employees.

The petitioner, Tarachand s/o Urkudaji Gajbhiye, a retired government employee, was aggrieved by an order dated 19.1.2016 issued by respondent No. 2, ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition of Retired Teacher Challenging Recovery of Gratuity and Salary. Recovery of Excess Payment from Class III Employee After Retirement Held Impermissible Under Principles of State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih.

The petitioner, Laxman Sitaram Idde, was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in a Zilla Parishad Primary School on 20 January 1986. He was a District Aw...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Gujarat High Court Quashes Recovery Order Against Employee in Voluntary Retirement Dispute — Employer Cannot Recover Excess Payment Without Opportunity of Hearing. Voluntary Retirement Application Deemed Accepted Under Rule 48 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 When Not Rejected Within Notice Period.

The petitioner, Arjun Gorabhai Rathod, was an employee of the State of Gujarat. He applied for voluntary retirement on 19.10.2019 with a notice period...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Employer's Challenge to Industrial Court Order Quashing Recovery of Excess Salary Paid Due to Employer's Mistake. Recovery of Rs.1,94,637/- from Retired Employee Set Aside as Employer's Inadvertence Cannot Be Visited on Employee.

The respondent, Sou. Anjali Anil Tare, was appointed as a Lower Division Clerk (LDC) in 1977 and passed her lower division grade examination in 1980, ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court Allows Writ Petition Quashing Recovery Order Against Retired Teacher -- Pensionary Benefits Ordered to Be Released Under Article 226 and Supreme Court Guidelines

The petitioner, a retired teacher, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to quash an order dated 08.06.2007 that direct...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Recovery of Salary from Retired Head Teacher Due to Delay and Lack of Misrepresentation. Recovery of overpayment made to a retired employee after a lapse of 4 years 11 months from retirement is unsustainable in law.

The petitioner, Donald Daniel Ferreira, was initially appointed as a Teacher in respondent no.9 school on 1 August 1990 and later appointed as Head Te...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition of Retired Teacher Challenging Recovery of Excess Salary from Gratuity. Recovery of Rs.1,39,316/- Set Aside as Payment Was Due to Departmental Error Without Misrepresentation by Employee.

The petitioner, Ashok Buchayya Pusalwar, was an Assistant Teacher with the Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli, appointed on 24-10-1996. He voluntarily retired...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Allows Retired Professor's Petition, Quashes Recovery from Gratuity and Pension. Recovery of Rs.8,43,782/- from retiral benefits set aside as employer failed to prove misrepresentation or fraud by employee, and recovery from pension/gratuity is impermissible under settled law.

The petitioner, Ganesh Sitaram Magar, a retired Ayurved professor, challenged the recovery of Rs.8,43,782/- from his gratuity and pension benefits. He...