← Library
Calcutta High CourtWP.CT/7/2025dismissed

The Honble Lt. Governor And ORS v. N.A.Rasheed And ORS

2025-03-11Hon'Ble Justice Soumen Sen,Hon'Ble Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

[ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR ] *** WP.CT/7/2025 The Hon'ble Lieutenant Governor and Others Vs.

N. A. Rasheed and Others Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Rakesh Kumar Mr. Dibesh Dwivedi ... for the petitioners Mr. Gopala Binnu Kumar ... for the respondents March 11, 2025 [SR] Item No.5 1.

The appeal is arising out of an order passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, Kolkata on 22nd November 2024 by which the petitioners had recovered Rs.1,59,168/- from the gratuity after the respondent No. 1 had retired from service on 31st December, 2018. 2.

Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty, learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioners has submitted that the said recovery was made pursuant an undertaking given by the respondent No.1 that in view the change of increment from January to July during the period from 1991 to 2002 and pay on pay on award of 2nd ACP with effect from 27.01.2002 insofar as the present respondent No. 1 is concerned may kindly be fixed from the DNI i.e. July, 2002.

3.

Irrespective of the fact that this letter may not have any relevance with regard to the recovery as it pertains to ACP, the petitioners could not have recovered any amount paid in excess from gratuity after he retired from service. The respondent No. 1 is a retired officer of the Andaman and Nicobar Administration,

and is not in dispute that the pay of the applicant was wrongly fixed whereas it would ought to have been revised by the petitioners with effect from March 1987 and not from January, 1986.

4.

The learned Tribunal has rightly recorded in its order that the pay of the applicant was wrongly fixed. On such consideration and having regard to the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab vs. Rafiq Maih, we are of the view that the recovery of the aforesaid sum is unjustified. The order of the learned Tribunal is affirmed. The writ petition is dismissed.

5.

On the prayer of the learned senior counsel, the time to pay the aforesaid sum with interest is extended by four weeks from date.

( Soumen Sen, J. ) (Raja Basu Chowdhury, J. )