Allowed

Asit Kumar Mallick v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Calcutta HC16 Jan 2023WPA/13848/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition filed by a retired Head Teacher seeking release of retirement dues. The court held that recovery of an erroneously credited amount from a retired employee is impermissible under Supreme Court precedents and directed the release of the amount with interest.

What did the court decide?

Release of Rs.2,49,757/- along with interest at 8% per annum to be made within eight weeks.

Asit Kumar Mallick Vs State of West Bengal… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Calcutta HC (2023)

¶1

16.01.2023 Item No.87 Court No.18 AJ.

¶2

W.P.A. 13848 of 2022

¶3

Asit Kumar Mallick -VsThe State of West Bengal & Ors.

¶4

Mrs. Sabita Khutia, Ms. Arpita Saha. …..for the petitioner. Ms. Sudipa Ray, Mr. Sajal Pandit. …..for the State.

¶5

The petitioner was the Head Teacher of a Secondary School, on December 31, 2020, he retired from his service on superannuation.

¶6

On April 12, 2021, the petitioner had to deposit a sum of Rs.2,49,757/- as the condition precedent for disbursement of his retiral dues since it was alleged that during the tenure of his service, he had overdrawn the said amount.

¶7

It appears from record that such overdrawn amount was credited to the petitioner on account of wrong pay fixation. The petitioner was not responsible for fixation of such erroneous pay scale.

¶8

In view of the several decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court e.g SHYAM BABU VERMA –VSUNION OF INDIA reported in (1994) 2 SCC 521 ; UNION OF INDIA & ORS. –VS- TARSEM SINGH reported in (2008) 8 SCC 648 and STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. -VS– RAFIQ MASIH (WHITE WASHER) & ORS. reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334 ,

¶9

¶10

the issue whether such overdrawn amount can be adjusted against the retiral benefits of an employee is no longer res integra .

¶11

However, to clarify the issue, paragraph ‘18’ of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rafiq Masih (supra) is quoted below :-

¶12

“ 18. It is not possible to postulate all situations of hardship which would govern employees on the issue of recovery, where payments have mistakenly been made by the employer, in excess of their entitlement. Be that as it may, based on the decisions referred to hereinabove, we may, as a ready reference, summarise the following few situations, wherein recoveries by the employers, would be impermissible in law :

¶13

(i) Recovery from the employees belonging to Class II and Class IV service (or Group C and Group D service).

¶14

(ii) Recovery from the retired employees, or the employees who are due to retire within one year of the order of recovery. (iii) Recovery from the employees, when the excess payment has been made for a period in excess of five years, before the order of recovery is issued.

¶15

(iv) Recovery in cases where an employee has wrongfully been required to discharge duties of a higher post and has been paid accordingly, even though he should have rightfully been required to work against an inferior post.

¶16

(v) In any other case, where the court arrives at the conclusion, that recovery if made from the employee, would be iniquitous or harsh or arbitrary to such an extent, as would far outweigh the equitable balance of the employer’s right to recover.”

¶17

In view of the discussion made above, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to the relief as prayed for.

¶18

Accordingly, the concerned Director of Pension, Provident Fund and Group Insurance, Government of West Bengal and also the

¶19

¶20

concerned Treasury Officer are directed to release the said amount of Rs.2,49,757/- along with interest @8% per annum thereon in favour of the petitioner from April 12, 2021 till the date of payment, such payment is to be made within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this order.

¶21

W.P.A. 13848 of 2022 is disposed of with the terms. There shall however be no order as to costs.

¶22

Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.

¶23

(Biswajit Basu, J.)

Asit Kumar Mallick v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asit Kumar Mallick v. State of West Bengal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sahana Bibi Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Dipali Roy Vs the State of West Bengal and Ors.

Arya Bakery Private Limited Vs Chief Executive Officer, Siliguri Jalpaiguri Development Authority and Anr.

Ratan Ghosh Vs Sankar Nath Dey and Ors.

Alok Kumar Jana Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.

Banshi Badan Pal Vs State of West Bengal and Ors.