The High Court quashed a government order for recovery of excess pay, holding that after a 10-year lapse, peak suggestions against recovery apply as the error was the government's.
The impugned order claiming recovery is quashed and set aside; Rule made absolute.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
(1)
955-wp-5045-2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
955 WRIT PETITION NO.5045 OF 2018
Shri. Sunil S/o Hanumantrao Rakade,
Age:- 47 years, Occ:- Service,
R/o at post Gondegaon,
Soyagaon, Tq. Soyagaon,
Dist. Aurangabad..PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra Through it's Secretary, Rural Development & Water Conservation Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2. Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad.
3. Block Development Officer Class-1 Panchayat Sammittee Soygaon, Tq. Soygaon, Dist. Aurangabad.
4. Chief Account and Finance Officer, Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad. ..RESPONDENTS
Mr. Bhagwan V. Thombre, Advocate for the
Petitioner.
Mr. S. B. Yawalkar, AGP for Respondents-State.
Mr. S. M. Ganachari, Advocate for Respondent Nos.2
to 4.
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ.
DATED : 21st AUGUST, 2019.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: S. V. Gangapurwala, J.):-
1.Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
With the consent of the parties, matter is taken up
for final hearing.
(2) 955-wp-5045-2018
2.The petitioner is assailing recovery
pursuant to the impugned order.
3.Mr. Thombre, learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that the petitioner had never
misrepresented in respect of the pay fixation.
Respondents on their own fixed the pay scale of the
petitioner. The benefit of the pay scale fixed by
the respondents was granted to the petitioner from
01.01.2006 to 31.03.2008 and the alleged excess
payment is sought to be recovered under order dated
04.01.2018. According to the learned counsel after
a long slumber, respondents cannot recover the
amount. The same would cause hardship to the
petitioner. The learned counsel submits that the
petitioner is working on Class-III post. The
learned counsel relies on the judgment of the Apex
Court in case of State Of Punjab & Ors vs Rafiq
Masih (White Washer) reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334.
4.The learned counsel for respondent nos.2
to 4 submits that, the previous pay scale was
wrongly given to the petitioner. On 01.10.2008 two
excess pay scale were given. As per circular dated
03.07.2009, the recovery can be claimed by the
respondents. The respondents are entitled to
recover the excess amount wrongly paid to the
petitioner.
(3) 955-wp-5045-2018
5.We have considered the submissions
canvassed by the learned counsel for the respective
parties.
6.The learned counsel for respondents does
not dispute that the petitioner is working on
Class-III post. The recovery is claimed after 10
years.
7.It is also not disputed that the pay
fixation has been wrongly done by respondents on
their own accord. The petitioner has never
misrepresented at any point of time. It would be
inequitable if recovery is claimed after lapse of
10 years. All parameters laid down in a case of
State Of Punjab & Ors vs Rafiq Masih (White Washer)
(supra) are attracted.
8.In the light of above, the impugned order
to the extent of claiming recovery is quashed and
set aside.
9.Rule is made absolute in above terms. No
costs.
(MANGESH S. PATIL) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA) JUDGE JUDGE
Devendra/August-19
2 issues framed by the court
Whether recovery of excess pay can be claimed after a lapse of over 10 years when the error was on the government side.
Whether principles from State Of Punjab vs Rafiq Masih apply to quash recovery orders filed late.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State Of Punjab & Ors vs Rafiq MasihApplied¶20
State Of Punjab & Ors vs Rafiq Masih (White Washer) (2015) 4 SCC 334 · Who else cites this
Shri Sunil S/o Hanumantrao Rakade
The State of Maharashtra Through its Secretary, Rural Development & Water Conservation Department
Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad
Block Development Officer Class-1 Panchayat Sammittee Soygaon
Chief Account and Finance Officer, Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad
S. V. Gangapurwala
Mangesh S. Patil
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court