JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)Instant petition is directed against order of the ld.Central Administrative Tribunal dt.21.08.2006.
(2.)The respondent employee approached the ld.Tribunal with the grievance that a sum of Rs.11,000/- has been arbitrarily recovered from his salary which could not have been legally recovered from him and made following prayer:-
"(i) by an appropriate order or direction the respondents be directed to make the payment of the entire amount so recovered by them pursuant to the fixation of the pay from Rs.4500-7500 to Rs.4000-6000 while the applicant was working as Sr.Typist with the respondents. The amount so recovered by the respondents be repaid to the applicant along with interest at the rate made admissible by the Supreme Court of India.
(ii) Cost may also be awarded to the applicant."
Brief facts of the case which may be noticed for the present purpose are that the respondent-employee belongs to the category of Typist and prior to implementation of recommendation of 5th Central Pay Commission, he was working as Senior Typist in the scale of Rs.1200-2040 which scale was at par with clerical cadre and after implementation of 5 th Pay Commission's recommendations, pay of the clerical cadre was revised to Rs.4500-7000 whereas the pay scale of the Senior Typist revised in the pay scale of Rs.4000-6000. Since the pay scales of Senior Typist and clerical cadre before recommendation of the 5 th Pay Commission were same, the respondent was also granted the pay scale of Rs.4500-7000 and when the discrepancy came to the notice of the authority, it was rectified vide order dt.15.10.1999 and after carrying out correction, he was fixed in the pay scale of Rs.4000-6000 and recovery of Rs.11,000/- was ordered to be made in easy installments from the respondent-applicant.
(3.)Although he could not approach at the relevant point of time but some of the employees filed their Original Application before the ld.Tribunal and in one of such Original Application No.39/2000 which was disposed of vide order dt.12.04.2002 it was held that recovery of the alleged excess amount from the employee could not have been even if he has received the excess payment as there was no fault and misrepresentation on his behalf placing reliance on judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Shyambabu Verma Vs. Union of India reported in 1994 SCC (L&S) 1320 and Sahib Ram Vs. State of Haryana and Ors. reported in 1995 SCC (L&S) 248 and taking note of the earlier order of the ld.Tribunal, of which reference has been made dt.12.04.2002, while disposing of the Original Application filed by the respondent, the ld.Tribunal arrived to the conclusion that recovery made from the respondent to the tune of Rs.11,000/- from his salary was not justified and accordingly directed to refund the said amount, recovered from the respondent, under order impugned dt.15.10.1999.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.