B.K.Narayana - (1.) -Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondents.
(2.) BY means of the present writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 7.9.2006 (Annexure-4 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent No. 3 by which an amount of Rs. 24,710, which was paid in excess to the salary, which the petitioner was entitled to receive, has been directed to be recovered from him. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation while working on the post of Pharmacist on 31.1.2006. Since the petitioner's retiral benefits were not being paid, he approached the respondent No. 4 for redressal of his grievances who, by his letter dated 17.3.2006, requested the respondent No. 2 to release 90% of the G.P.F. amount in favour of the petitioner. It appears that another letter dated 21.6.2006 was issued by the respondent No. 4 to the respondent No. 3 seeking parawise reply to the queries contained therein. Although the said letter contains an endorsement that a copy of the said order was forwarded to the petitioner also but, according to the petitioner, copy of the same was never served upon him. A true copy of the letter/order dated 21.6.2006 is on record as Annexure-3 to the writ petition. In the said letter it was mentioned that the petitioner had been erroneously granted selection grade on 1.1.1986 in the pay scale of Rs. 1,350-2,200 to which the petitioner was not entitled as the petitioner had already been granted selection grade on 1.7.1985 and in place of Rs. 1,380 the petitioner was entitled to a salary of Rs. 1,350 only and accordingly the subsequent fixation of the petitioner's salary made on the basis of aforesaid erroneous fixation on 1.7.1995, 1.1.1996, 1.7.1996 and 1.7.2000 were liable to be revised and the amount which the petitioner had received as excess salary under wrong fixation, was liable to be recovered from the petitioner.
(3.) AFTER issuance of order/letter dated 21.6.2006 by the respondent No. 4, the respondent No. 3 passed the impugned order dated 7.9.2006 illegally deducting a sum of Rs. 24,710, allegedly paid to the petitioner in excess of the salary, which the petitioner was entitled to receive on account of erroneous fixation of the petitioner's salary on 1.1.1986, from the amount of Rs. 2,56,041 which the petitioner was found entitled to receive by the same order towards his encashment and other retiral benefits. True copy of the order dated 7.9.2006 is appended as Annexure-4 to the writ petition. The ground of challenge is that it is not open to the respondents employer to recover any amount of salary already paid to the petitioner, even if, it was found subsequently that the petitioner employee was not entitled to payment of the said amount unless the allegation is there that such payment was made on account of playing fraud or misrepresentation by the recipient of the said amount.;