Allowed

Namita Sen Gupta v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC5 Sept 2023CWJC/9999/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judge Writ petition challenged an order directing the recovery of excess pension. The court held that recovery under the cited Supreme Court precedent was not permissible without a hearing and without the petitioner being responsible for misappropriation, setting aside the recovery order and directing pension payment.

What did the court decide?

Memo No. 35 dated 02.02.2023 set aside; Treasury Officer directed to communicate bank for pension payment; AC Secretary directed to take legal action.

Namita Sen Gupta Vs The State of Bihar — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.9999 of 2023

¶2

======================================================

¶3

Namita Sen Gupta, Female, aged about 61 years, Wife of Praphul Banjerjee, Resident of Ward No. 6, Near Railway Water Tank, Post Office and Police Station- Sugauli, District- East Champaran.

¶4

... ... Petitioner/s

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar through the Additional Chief Secretary, Health Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶7

The Director in Chief, Health Department, Government of Bihar, Patna.

¶8

¶9

The Accountant General (A and E), Bihar, Patna.

¶10

The Civil Surgeon- cum- Chief Medical Officer, Sadar Hospital Motihari, District- East Champaran.

¶11

The In Charge Medical Officer, Sadar Block, Motihari, District- East Champaran.

¶12

... ... Respondent/s

¶13

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Mujtabaul Haque, GP-12 Mr. Manish Kumar, AC to GP-12 For the A.G. : Mr. Bindhyachal Rai, Advocate

¶14

======================================================

¶15

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT

¶16

Date : 05-09-2023

¶17

Heard Mr. Anil Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Mr. Mujtabaul Haque, learned GP-12 appearing on behalf of the State and Mr. Bindhyachal Rai, learned counsel for the Accountant General, Bihar.

¶18

The In-Charge Medical Officer, Sadar Block, Motihari, East Champaran, has communicated a letter no. 35 dated 02.02.2023 to the District Treasury Officer, Motihari, that a sum of Rs. 3,48,962/- has been paid in excess to the petitioner and directed the District Treasury Officer, Motihari, to recover

¶19

Patna High Court CWJC No.9999 of 2023 dt.05-09-2023 2/3

¶20

the said amount at his own level. The petitioner had retired from the post of A.N.M. (Auxiliary Nurse Midwifery) from the Block Hospital, Sadar Block Motihari, East Champaran.

¶21

This Court finds that the direction contained in Memo No. 35 dated 02.02.2023 is without jurisdiction and such direction to the Treasury Officer to deduct Rs. 3,48,962/-, being passed without affording petitioner any opportunity of hearing which affects the petitioner adversely and being penal is not in accordance with law. The law relating to recovery from ‘GroupC & D’ employees is well settled by the Apex Court in case of State Of Punjab & Others Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) & Anr. reported in [(2015) 4 SCC 334]. Petitioner is not responsible for any misrepresentation or misappropriation and the same cannot be recovered from the petitioner. Accordingly, the order and direction contained in Memo No. 35 dated 02.02.2023 is set aside.

¶22

This Court directs the District Treasury Officer, Motihari, East Champaran, to communicate the bank to make payment of the pension as fixed by the Accountant General, Bihar in accordance with law.

¶23

The Additional Chief Secretary, Health Department, Government of Bihar, is directed to take

¶24

Patna High Court CWJC No.9999 of 2023 dt.05-09-2023 3/3

¶25

appropriate legal action against the officers who have incorrectly fixed the provisional pension of the petitioner and gratuity in accordance with law.

¶26

With above observation and direction, the present writ petition is disposed of.

¶27

(Purnendu Singh, J)

¶28

Niraj/Nilmani

¶29

AFR/NAFR	N.A.F.R.
CAV DATE	N/A
Uploading Date	06.09.2023
Transmission Date	N/A

Namita Sen Gupta v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Namita Sen Gupta v. The State of Bihar

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

Shanti Bhuiyan Vs The State of Bihar

Saroj Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Bharat Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Ashok Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Heera Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Satya Narayan Choudhary Vs The State of Bihar