STATE OF UTTARAKHAND THROUGH SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, DEHRADUN AND OTHERS Vs. STATE PUBLIC SERVICE TRIBUNAL AND ANOTHERS
LAWS(ALL)-2010-8-384
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on August 10,2010

State of Uttarakhand through Secretary, Revenue Department, Dehradun Appellant
VERSUS
STATE PUBLIC SERVICE TRIBUNAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

SUDHANSHU DHULIA AND TARUN AGARWALA, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri K. P. Upadhaya, the learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the petitioners and Sri B. S. Negi, the learned counsel for the respondent no.2.
(2.) THE present writ petition has been filed for the quashing of the order dated 16.05.2008 passed by the Public Service Tribunal allowing the claim of respondent no.2. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition is, that the respondent no.2 Ram Nath Sharma was promoted as a Registrar Kanoongo on 26th March, 1990 and, thereafter, promoted as an Assistant Record Officer on 26th September, 2001. The said respondent, eventually, retired from service on 31 st July, 2005. During the course of his service, the said respondent was granted a second promotional pay scale in the pay scale of Rs.8000-13,500 w.e.f. 14th August, 2000 by an order of the Collector and, based on the said order, the said respondent was receiving the promotional pay scale. On 28th March, 2003, the Additional Commissioner (Revenue) submitted a report indicating therein that the said respondent was wrongly fixed and that a sum of Rs.1,43,498/- had been paid in excess and was liable to be recovered from the said respondent. When the respondent employee came to know about it, he made a representation which remained pending in the State Government and, eventually, the petitioner retired on 31 st July, 2005. Since the post retiral benefits were not being released, the respondent employee gave an affidavit indicating that the excess amount may be recovered from his provident fund, gratuity, etc. It has come on record that the excess amount was recovered from his post retiral dues and the balance amount was paid to the respondent employee.
(3.) THE respondent, consequently, filed a claim before the Public Service Tribunal alleging that the recovery of Rs.1,43,498/- was illegally made from the respondent and, in any case, the said recovery was in violation of the principle of natural justice in as much as no notice or opportunity of hearing was provided.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.