- (1.) The Writ Petition No.66820 of 2010 has been filed by the Chief Account Officer (GPF), Controller of Communication Accounts and Union of India, and the Writ Petition No.68908 of 2010 has been filed by the Chief General Manager U.P. East Telecom Circle, Telecom District Manager, B.S.N.L. Jaunpur and Accounts Officer (Cash), O/o T.D.M. B.S.N.L. Jaunpur.
(2.) In both the writ petitions the petitioners are challenging the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad dated 11.08.2010 in Original Application No.1392 of 2009.
(3.) The brief facts of the case are that the respondent was the employee in the Department of Telecommunication since 21.03.1969 and retired on 29.5.2003. After six years from the date of retirement a recovery notice dated 17.08.2009? has been issued by the petitioners asking the respondent to pay the sum of Rs.1,12,525/-. According to the notice, the respondent has been paid the amount in excess in the financial year 1996-97. The respondent filed his reply vide letter dated 15.09.2009 contesting the notice on the ground that the recovery after the retirement of six years is illegally, arbitrarily and without jurisdiction. When no response has been received from the petitioners, the respondent filed a Writ Petition No.53004 of 2009, which has been dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy. In pursuance thereof the respondent filed Original Application No.1392 of 2009 before the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide order dated 11.08.2010 allowed the Original Application. The Tribunal held as follows:- "I have heard both the counsel and perused the record on file. It is clear that the mistake in the opening balance was made by the employer and was not due to any concealment of fact or fraud committed by the employer. It is also normal practice for financial statements to be accepted as correct. The applicant retired and mistake was not detected at that time hence all retiral benefits were given to him. It is only after a lapse of 6 years that mistake was detected and now he is being asked to make good the payment made to him. I am of the opinion that mistake in the opening balance was made by the office staff dealing with the matter and there was no concealment or fraud committed by the applicant in the matter. Therefore, placing reliance on two judgments of Hon'ble High Court (referred to above), no case seems to be made out for recovery from the applicant at this stage.";