Allowed

Animesh Ch Ghosh v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC3 Feb 2021WP(C)/421/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a teacher, approached the Court as recovery proceedings were initiated for salary drawn after superannuation due to an erroneous date of birth entry in his service book. With no fraud alleged, the High Court quashed the recovery order.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the impugned order dated 06.01.2021 directing recovery of salary. Direction to determine pension based on salary till Dec 2019.

Animesh Ch Ghosh Vs the State of Assam and 5… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Gauhati HC (2021)

¶1

Page No.# 1/4

¶2

GAHC010010972021

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C)/421/2021

¶5

ANIMESH CH GHOSH

¶6

S/O- LT. LAKHI KANTA GHOSH, R/O- WARD NO. 14, COLLEGE ROAD BYELANE, TOWN, P.O. BIDYAPARA, DIST.- DHUBRI, ASSAM, PIN- 783324

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 ORS REP. BY ITS COMM. AND SECY. TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM, DEPTT. OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION, DISPUR, GHY-06

¶9

2:DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION KAHILIPARA GHY-19

¶10

3:DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER DHUBRI PIN- 783301 4:BLOCK ELEMENTARY EDUCATION OFFICER GOURIPUR DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 783331

¶11

5:THE DIRECTOR OF PENSION HOUSEFED COMPLEX CENTRAL BLOCK 6TH FLOOR BELTOLA ROAD GHY PIN- 781006

¶12

Page No.# 2/4

¶13

6:HEADMASTER JHAGRARPAR M.V.SCHOOL P.O. BIDYAPARA DIST.- DHUBRI ASSAM PIN- 78832

¶14

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S K GHOSH

¶15

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, ELEM. EDU

¶16

BEFORE

¶17

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK

¶18

ORDER

¶19

03-02-2021

¶20

Heard Mr. S. K. Ghosh, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. N. Phukan, learned Standing counsel, Elementary Education Department for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and Mr. B. Deuri, learned Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent No. 5.

¶21

Because of his over stay in service from 1^st January, 2020 to 31^st December, 2020, the respondents in the Elementary Education Department by the impugned order dated 06.01.2021 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition), issued by the Block Elementary Education Officer (BEEO), Gauripur, District-Dhubri, directed the petitioner to return an amount of Rs.7,49,412/- that he had drawn, though the petitioner should have retired from service on 31.12.2019 on attaining the age of superannuation at 60 years.

¶22

Being aggrieved with the same, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition.

¶23

It is seen that the petitioner was serving as a Science Teacher in Jhagrapar M.V. School in the Gauripur Education Block of Dhubri district, a provincialised Upper Primary School of the State.

¶24

In the Service Book of the petitioner, his date of birth was shown as 31.12.1960 and on the basis of the same, the petitioner continued in service upto 31.12.2020 till attaining the age of superannuation at 60 years.

¶25

Page No.# 3/4

¶26

However, while submitting the necessary documents for his pension including his High School Leaving Certificate Examination, 1977 passed certificate issued by the SEBA on 27.06.1977, the authorities on verification found that the petitioner was 17 years 3 months on 01.03.1977 as per the said Certificate issued by the SEBA and as such, his date of birth was determined as 01.12.1959.

¶27

As the petitioner continued in his service upto 31.12.2020 because of wrong entry in his service book, the respondents in the Elementary Education Department are now, contemplating to recover the said amount of Rs.7,49,412/- , the entire salary that the petitioner had drawn w.e.f., 1^st January, 2020 to 31^st December, 2020.

¶28

From the perusal of the order dated 06.01.2021 of the BEEO, Gauripur, it can be seen that the authority clearly mentioned in the said order that the petitioner overstayed in service from January, 2020 to December, 2020 due to wrong entry of the date of birth in his Service Book as 31.12.1960 instead of 01.12.1959.

¶29

It is not the case of the respondents that the petitioner overstayed in service from 01.01.2020 to 31.12.2020 and had drawn excess pay/salary by committing fraud, misrepresenting fact in collusion with some erring officials, but due to wrong entry in his Service Book.

¶30

The Service Book of the petitioner during his tenure was countersigned by the concerned departmental authority in the Elementary Education Department of the State. It is also not the case of the respondents that the petitioner did not render his service from 01.01.2020 to 31.12.2020.

¶31

After hearing the learned counsels for the parties, considering the entire aspect of the matter and for the reasons above, the Court is of the opinion that the impugned order issued by the Block Elementary Education Officer (BEEO), Gauripur, District-Dhubri under No. GB/PA43/2019/20/44 dated 06.01.2021 is not sustainable in law and the same is hereby set aside and quashed.

¶32

However, it is made clear that the respondents in the Elementary Education Department as well as the Directorate of Pension shall determine the pension amount of the petitioner on the basis of the salary received by the petitioner till December, 2019 and shall pay him his

¶33

Page No.# 4/4

¶34

pension and other pensionary benefit in accordance with law at the earliest.

¶35

With the above observation and direction this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶36

JUDGE

¶37

Comparing Assistant

Animesh Ch Ghosh v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Animesh Ch Ghosh v. the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gulzar Hussain Vs the State of Assam and 7 Ors.

Abdul Kadir Miah Vs the State of Assam and 6 Ors.

Prasanta Borthakur Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Humaun Roshid Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

Md. Mohammad Ali Zinnah @ Md. Mahammad Ali Zinnah Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Baharun Nahar Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.