Court disposed of writ petition challenging tribunal order on pension recovery. Relying on earlier order in WP(C) 9060 of 2016, court confirmed tribunal decision allowing pension despite service calculation disputes regarding training period.
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.
W.P.(C) NO.2312 OF 2017
20.06.2017 Heard learned Standing Counsel for School and Mass Education Department on beh
alf of the petitioners and learned counsel for opposite party no.1.
2. This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 10.12
.2014 passed by the State Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, Bhubaneswar in O.A. No.117
7 of 2014 directing the petitioners not to recover any amount pursuant to the orders dated 18.
06.2013 and 29.03.2014 and disburse the pension and all other retiral benefits in favour of op
posite party no.1 within a period of two months from the date of communication of the order.
3. It is contended that opposite party no.1 had entered into service as Primary School Te
acher on 30.12.1970. He had acquired C.T qualification on 12.10.1977. After completion of trai
ning he had also continued as Asst. Teacher till 20.05.2006 and thereafter promoted to the pos
t of Headmaster on 22.05.2006. While continuing as such, he retired from service on attaining
the age of superannuation w.e.f. 31.01.2009. During the period of his service, he was granted
TBA/ACP on completion of 15/25/30 years of service as per O.R.S.P. Rules, 1998 and O.R.S.P. Ru
les, 2008 taking into account the initial date of his joining. After his retirement pension pa
pers along with his Service Book had also been sent to the Controller of Accounts on the basis
of his last pay drawn for sanction of pension and other retiral benefits. However, the same r
eturned to the District Inspector of Schools, Puri with a direction to assess the excess payme
nt and recover the same from D.C.R.G, on the ground that T.B.A/A.C.P. has been sanctioned in f
avour of opposite party no.1 taking into account the service from the date of
his initial joining but not from the date of passing C.T. examination. The Tribunal after hear
ing the parties came to the conclusion that the training period shall be taken into account to
wards continuity in one post/grade for the purpose of granting of TBA/ACP. Accordingly, the Tr
ibunal has passed the impugned order directing the petitioners not to recover any amount pursu
ant to the orders dated 18.06.2013 and 29.03.2014 and disburse the pension and all other retir
al benefits in favour of opposite party no.1 within a period of two months from the date of co
mmunication of the order.
4. Learned counsel for opposite party no.1 submitted that earlier a similar matter was be
fore this Court in W.P.(C) No.9060 of 2016 along with batch of cases. This Court by order date
d 05.04.2017 disposed of the said Writ Petition confirming the order of the Tribunal. Learned
Standing Counsel for School and Mass Education Department also accepts the said submission.
5. In view of the above, this Court disposes of this Writ Petition in the light of the or der dated 05.04.2017 passed in W.P.(C) No.9060 of 2016 along with batch of cases.
2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to challenge the Tribunal's order directing pension disbursement without recovery of excess payment based on training period inclusion.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Confirmed order of the Tribunal in batch of casesRelied on¶5
W.P.(C) No.9060 of 2016
Petitioners
Opposite Party no.1
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court