Retired Junior Engineer challenged recovery of excess pay from DCRG based on re-fixation of pay scale allegedly wrongly fixed in 1985. The Court held recovery impermissible where benefits were extended by the employer and the employee had retired, quashed the official memorandum, and directed refund with interest at 6% p.a.
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.
NC: 2024:KHC:14587 WP No. 4184 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM
WRIT PETITION NO.4184 OF 2024 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
JOSEPH C S/O C A PHILIP AGED ABOUT 70 YEARS RETIRED JUNIOR ENGINEER (ELE) R/AT NO.49, JOJEN VILLA 19TH MAIN, 5TH CROSS MEI LAYOUT HESARGHATTA ROAD BENGALURU – 560 073 (SENIOR CITIZEN BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED) …PETITIONER
(BY SRI.SRINIVASA K, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by CHAITHRA A Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
AND:
…RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.A.ANIRUDH KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM BEARING NO.EEE/SRS/AO/ AAO/F-8/4842 DTD 05.03.2013 ISSUED BY THE R-4 VIDE ANNEXURE-B TO THE WRIT PETITION AND ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The captioned writ petition is filed assailing
impugned re-fixation of pay scale made by respondent No.4 and consequent recovery made by respondent No.4
to the tune of Rs.1,62,943/- vide Annexure-F, F1 and F2.
NC: 2024:KHC:14587 WP No. 4184 of 2024
2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4.
respondents – Authorities has tried to justify the action of respondents by contending that recovery was justified as petitioner’s salary was wrongly fixed, this Court is not inclined to accede to the said argument.
is of the view that respondent No.4 was not justified in recovering an amount of Rs.1,62,943/- out of DCRG
amount of the petitioner on the ground that the pay scale of the petitioner was wrongly fixed from 1985. This Court, through a series of judgments, has established a precedent whereby recovery due to incorrect fixation of pay scale is deemed impermissible, particularly in instances where incremental benefits have been autonomously extended by the Authority. Both the Hon'ble
NC: 2024:KHC:14587 WP No. 4184 of 2024
Apex Court and this Court, in a consistent line of rulings, have underscored the principle that employees bear no responsibility in securing such benefits nor do they play any part in the fixation of pay scales. Consequently, the Hon'ble Apex Court has consistently ruled that respondents, especially towards the conclusion of an employee's career or fag end of service tenure, are precluded from initiating recovery proceedings.
resolved to recover an amount of Rs.1,62,943/- on the ground that petitioner’s pay scale was wrongly fixed in 1985 up to 2006. This exercise of recovery is sought to be implemented by respondents – Authorities after petitioner attained age of superannuation. Even on this count, the action is found to be unreasonable and is not supported by law. In that view of the matter, the impugned recovery made by the Authorities pursuant to the alleged re-fixation as evident from Annexure-B is unsustainable. The Official Memorandum bearing No.EEE/SRS/AO/AAO/F-8/4842
dated 05.03.2013 issued by respondent No.4 as per Annexure-B is liable to be quashed. Consequently, respondent No.4 is bound to re-pay entire recovery amount of Rs.1,62,943/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a.
to pass the following;
ORDER
(i) The writ petition is allowed.
(ii) Respondent No.4 is hereby directed to refund an amount of Rs.1,62,943/- along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. w.e.f. 01.04.2013 till date of payment.
(iii) The refund shall be made by respondent No.4 within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of order copy. Failing which, respondent No.4 is further liable to
pay interest at the rate of 18% p.a. thereof.
(iv) Pending applications, if any, are
also disposed off.
Sd/JUDGE
NBM
List No.: 1 Sl No.: 3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether recovery of Rs.1,62,943 from the petitioner's DCRG on account of alleged wrong pay-scale fixation from 1985 was permissible after superannuation.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Joseph C
The Director (A and HR), KPTCL
The General Manager (A and HR), BESCOM
Superintending Engineer (Ele), BESCOM O & M South Circle
Executive Engineer (Ele), KPTCL TL & SS Division SRS Peenya
Sachin Shankar Magadum
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
