DIPALI GOGOI BORGOHAIN Vs. STATE OF ASSAM AND 4 ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. D. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Girin Pegu, learned counsel for the respondents No.1 and 2 being the Pension and Public Grivances Department and the Director of Pension and Mr. A. Phukan, learned counsel for the respondents No.3, 4 and 5 being the authorities under the Elementary Education Department of the Govt. of Assam.

(2.) The husband of the petitioner Bikash Borgohain was temporarily appointed on 20/11/1999 as an Assistant Teacher in the scale of Rs.3130.0060-3490-90- 4030-EB-4430-120-5200-175-6600/- per month. By a subsequent order dtd. 31/3/2003 the husband of the petitioner was absorbed in an existing post of Assistant Teacher in the Kalakata M.E. School. While he was in service the husband of the petitioner died on 15/6/2009. After the death, the petitioner was paid an amount of Rs.30,000.00 on 19/1/2010 towards Group Insurance Scheme which was subscribed by her deceased husband during his service period. On 6/6/2017 the petitioner was issued with a no liability certificated by the Headmaster of Kalakata M.E. School and on the same day the last pay certificate of the husband of the petitioner was also issued and ratified by the Block Elementary Education Officer. When the teacher concerned had died on 15/6/2009 we see no reason as to why the Headmaster of Kalakata M.E. School had taken almost eight years to issue the no liability certificate and the last pay certificate of the husband of the petitioner. Such act on the part of the Headmaster is deprecated and the Director of Elementary Education, Assam is directed to take note of the said conduct of the Headmaster and take appropriate action for causing undue harassment to the wife of the deceased employee.

(3.) As per the last pay certificate the deceased husband of the petitioner was drawing Rs.13,229.00 comprising of Rs.9810.00 as Basic Pay per month and action allowance as D.A. Rs.2158.00, M.A- 350/- and Rs.981.00 as HR with deduction of GIS Rs.30.00 and Professional Tax of Rs.208.00 per month. After receiving the document, the petitioner made an application to the District Elementary Education Officer, Sivasabar with a request to confirm the service of the husband of the petitioner and for the purpose had enclosed a copy of the appointment letter. The District Elementary Education Officer on 13/3/2019 had issued a letter to the petitioner containing certain objection raised by the Director of Pension, Assam for the purpose of pension. As per the letter dtd. 13/3/2019 the petitioner was required to deposit/refund an amount of Rs.4,293.00 towards excess salary drawn by the deceased husband of the petitioner. We again deprecate such act, the said action on the part of the Director of Pension of the DEEO, Sivasagar to the extent that under the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Shyam Babu Verma and others vs. Union of India and others, reported in (1994) 2 SCC 521 and State of Punjab and Others vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and others, reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334 an excess salary drawn by a retired employee and more so by a deceased employee cannot be recovered unless there is a conclusion that such amount was paid in excess because of any fraudulent fault on the part of the employee concerned. As the employee had already died in the meantime, there cannot remain any further situation for the parties to arrive at any such conclusion that it was because of fraudulent act on the part of the deceased husband of the petitioner that the excess amount was paid to him. As no further progress had been made for pension by the petitioner, she submitted a representation dtd. 6/12/2021 before the Commissioner and Secretary to the Govt. of Assam in the Elementary Education Department requesting that the period of five months ten days which was short of the qualifying period of ten years of service for pension to be condoned.