AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Aradhana Johri, Member (A)
The applicant was engaged by the respondents as substitute Safaiwala on 14.01.1984. He was screened for regularisation in Railway Service in 1987 and promoted to the next higher grade at regular intervals as per the extant rules. He retired from the post of Senior Technician (C&W) on attaining the age of superannuation, on 31.07.2020. On 03.06.2020 his pay was revised due to the earlier clerical error and adjustment of wages and necessary recovery was ordered prior to settlement of his post retirement dues.
The applicant has challenged this recovery order and stated that this recovery is illegal and arbitrary. It is his contention that the concerned authorities cannot adjust any dues after such a long gap. As per the applicant this recovery is clearly barred vide orders in the case of State of Punjab and others etc. vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and ors., (2015) 4 SCC 334.
The respondents have denied the claims of the applicant. They have stated that the reason for adjustment has been leave without pay and the applicant was a habitual absentee which is apparent from the total period of absence of 1679 days which is treated as leave without pay. Due to this leave without pay, certain adjustments were necessary in the settlement dues of the applicant, therefore, there can be no question of time barring.
Heard Shri R.K. Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Shailender Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondents.
On a perusal of the impugned order dated 03.06.2020 (Annexure A-1), it is evident that recovery has been ordered without issuing any notice to the applicant which is against the settled law. Accordingly, order dated 03.06.2020 is set aside. However, the respondents are free to pass fresh orders after giving due notice to the applicant and considering the arguments he puts forth. It is made clear that no comments are being made on the merits of the case.
No order as to costs.