AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
ORDER
Mr. Shiv Mangal Prajapti, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents, are present and heard.
The instant Original Application has been filed seeking the following reliefs: -
“A) To issue an order or direction to quash the notice dated 10.8.2026 issued by Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, North Central Railway, Agra (Annexure A-1) whereby intimated for recovery of Rs. 1346550/- from the applicant.
B) To issue any order or direction commanding the respondents that they may not recover any amount from the pension of applicant in pursuance of alleged notice issued for recovery of amount from the pension of applicant.
C) To issue any other and further relief which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper be also awarded to the applicant.
D) Cost of proceeding be awarded to the applicant.”
The brief facts of the case are that the applicant, while working as Chief Loco Inspector under North Central Railway, retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation w.e.f. 31.07.2023. After his retirement, vide impugned notice dated 10.08.2026 issued by the Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, North Central Railway, Agra, recovery of Rs.13,46,550/- has been proposed from his pension on account of alleged excess payment. The applicant states that the benefit of stepping-up of pay was granted to him by the competent authority vide Office Order No. X-66/2020 dated 21.08.2020, pursuant to the applicable Railway Board instructions. It is further stated that the applicant was promoted as Chief Loco Inspector on 10.03.1997, whereas Shri Ravindra Singh was promoted to the said post on 17.11.2006. The applicant contends that the alleged excess payment was not obtained by him by fraud or misrepresentation and that the recovery has been proposed only after his retirement.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the impugned notice dated 10.08.2026 proposing recovery of Rs.13,46,550/- from the applicant's pension is unsustainable, as the benefit of stepping-up of pay was granted by the competent authority and the applicant had neither committed any fraud nor made any misrepresentation. He further submitted that the recovery has been proposed after the applicant's retirement and without following the procedure prescribed under the Railway Services (Pension) Rules, 1993. Relying upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, including Thomas Daniel v. State of Kerala, Civil Appeal No. 7115 of 2010 and Rafiq Masih, learned counsel submitted that such recovery from a retired employee is impermissible in the facts of the present case.
Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that upon review of the applicant's pay fixation in terms of the relevant Railway Board instructions, particularly RBE No. 7/2020 dated 27.01.2020, the benefit of stepping-up of pay earlier granted to the applicant was found inadmissible. Accordingly, the said benefit has been withdrawn and consequential recovery of Rs.13,46,550/- has been proposed. He, therefore, submitted that no interference is warranted in the present O.A.
At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the respondents/Competent Authority to consider and decide the representation dated 24.08.2026 submitted by the applicant against the impugned notice dated 10.08.2026, in accordance with law, and till such decision is taken, the impugned notice dated 10.08.2026 may not be given effect to.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without entering into the merits of the matter and keeping in view the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the applicant, I am of the opinion that the ends of justice would be served in case the respondents/Competent Authority are directed to consider and decide the representation dated 24.08.2026 submitted by the applicant by passing a reasoned and speaking order, in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Till such decision is taken, the impugned notice dated 10.08.2026 shall not be given effect to by the respondents.
It is made clear that this Tribunal has not entered into the merits of the case.
Accordingly, the Original Application stands disposed of at the admission stage itself. No order as to costs.
All pending Miscellaneous Applications, if any, stand disposed of.