Quashed

Sobhakant Lal Das v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Patna HC9 Aug 2012CWJC/13663/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court set aside an order directing recovery of Rs. 10,406.30 due to lack of a show cause notice, violating natural justice. The court ordered the department to reopen the matter, issue a fresh notice, and provide a reasoned order within a stipulated timeline, mandating refund if timelines are missed.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 20.6.2007 directing recovery is set aside. Respondents to issue fresh show cause notice if not distinguished from C.W.J.C. No.8765 of 2009, and refund amount on failure to adhere to ti

Sobhakant Lal Das Vs the State of Bihar and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13663 of 2012

¶3

====================================================== 1. Sobhakant Lal Das S/O Late Indra Lal Das Resident Of VillageBargaon, P.O- Bargaon, P.S- Basnehi, District- Saharsa. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Secretary, The Department Of Finance, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna. 3. The Secretary, The Department Of Health, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna. 4. The Collector, District- Saharasa. 5. The Deputy Controller Of Accounts (Finance), Kosi Division, Saharsa. 6. District Accounts Officer, Saharsa. 7. Civil Surgeon At Saharsa, District- Saharsa. 8. Medical Officer In Charge, Primary Health Centre, Sonwarsa, DistrictSaharasa. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mallika Mazumdar For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rajesh Kr.Verma Sc27 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA ORAL ORDER 2 09-08-2012 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 20.6.2007 directing recovery of Rs. 10,406.30/- paisa from him on the ground of audit objection No. 149/2004-05 allegedly due to wrong pay fixation. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the order was issued and deductions made without an opportunity of defence. The petitioner was rightly granted the legitimate pay scale pursuant to the resolution of the Finance Department dated 18.12.1989. Reliance is further placed on a similar order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 8765 of 2009 against the

¶4

Patna High Court CWJC No.13663 of 2012 (2) dt.09-08-2012

¶5

2 / 3

¶6

same impugned order. It is submitted that the counter affidavit filed itself did not support the impugned order leading to grant of relief.

¶7

Counsel for the State raises a question of delay. The Court does not consider the same relevant. The cause of action is individual. No third party rights are affected. The deductions have already been made. The Court is stated to have struck down a similar order in C.W.J.C. No.8765 of 2009.

¶8

The impugned order not mention that any opportunity of defence was given to the petitioner or that he did not reply to the show cause notice. It prima facie satisfies the Court and lend credence to the submission that he was not heard.

¶9

The order dated 20.6.2007 is accordingly set aside as being in violation of the principles of natural justice. Since deduction has already been made, there shall be no immediate refund to the petitioner.

¶10

Let the respondents inter alia examine the order of the Court in C.W.J.C. No.8765 of 2009 along with the counter affidavit filed therein. If the respondents are satisfied that the order in C.W.J.C. No.8765 of 2009 is distinguishable they shall issue show cause notice mentioning the grounds of distinction. If they are satisfied that his case is covered by the same, they are required to give him similar treatment by

¶11

Patna High Court CWJC No.13663 of 2012 (2) dt.09-08-2012

¶12

3 / 3

¶13

refund of the deducted amount.

¶14

If the respondents opine otherwise, they shall issue show cause notice to the petitioner within a maximum period of three weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order in the manner discussed. The petitioner shall file his reply within three weeks thereafter. The respondents shall then pass the final reasoned and speaking order within a maximum period of two weeks from the date that the petitioner submits his reply.

¶15

If the respondents do not adhere to the time scheduled fixed herein and the delay is occasioned not for any fault attributable to the petitioner, the respondents shall be obliged to refund the amount to him in light of the order in C.W.J.C. No. 8765 of 2009, after expiry of the time so fixed in the present order.

¶16

The writ application stands disposed.

¶17

P. Kumar/-

¶18

(Navin Sinha, J)

Sobhakant Lal Das v. the State of Bihar and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sobhakant Lal Das v. the State of Bihar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kalamuddin Mian Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Bimal Chand Vs the State of Bihar and Ors.

Nakul Mandal @ Popli Mandal Vs the State of Bihar

Dr.Ashok Daulatram Bhagat Sing Vs the Vice Chancellor,Lalit Nara

Dr.Ashok Kumar Singh Vs Bhim Rao Ambedkar Bihar Univer

Jiramani Devi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.