No Recovery Permissible From Retiral Benefits Of Employee Holding Class-III Post On Grounds Of Excess Payment.: Manipur High Court

Background Facts

W. Manileima Devi (Petitioner) was appointed Substitute Assistant Graduate Teacher in 1986 by Director of Education, Manipur (DEM) for a period of 6 months and her services were extended from time to time. By an order dated 21.07.1992 by DEM, the Petitioner was temporarily appointed Arts Graduate Teacher. Further by an order dated 16.02.2005 by DEM, the period of her service from the date of her appointment on substitute basis in 1986 till her regular appointment as an Arts Graduate Teacher in 1992 was regularized. The Petitioner superannuated on 31.10.2019 after attaining the age of superannuation.

After the retirement of the Petitioner, due process was taken for releasing her pension and other retiral benefits. However, the Office of the Accountant General wrote a letter to the Under Secretary (Pension Cell), Government of Manipur in 2020 highlighting some irregularities in the fixation of the pay scale of the Petitioner and requested the Under Secretary to make the requisite rectifications in the irregularities.

However, no action was taken towards rectifications of the errors and consequently, the Petitioner did not get her retiral benefits for almost 5 years since her retirement. Thus, the writ petition was filed.

It was contended by the Petitioner that even if it is assumed that some excess payments were made the Petitioner, they were made more than 19 years ago and the Respondent cannot make the recovery of the alleged excess payment from the retiral benefits and pension of the Petitioner.

On the other hand, it was contended by the Respondents that certain irregularities were committed by the authorities in fixation of pay scale of the Petitioner and in regularizing her past service rendered on substitute basis. Thus, till the time the requisite rectifications are not made, the pensionary or other retiral benefits due to the Petitioner cannot be released.

Findings of the Court

The court observed that even assuming that any irregularity is committed by the relevant authorities in fixation of pay of the Petitioner, the same was done nearly 2 decades ago. Further the Petitioner has attained the age of superannuation. Thus, no recovery can be made by the authorities from the retiral benefits and other service benefits of the petitioner.

The court placed reliance on the case of State of Punjab & ors. Vs. Rafique Masih (White Washer) & ors wherein the Supreme Court had held that recoveries by the employer would be impermissible in law when it is a:- (i) recovery from the employees belonging to Class III and Class IV service (or Group C and Group D service); (ii) recovery from the retired employees, or the employees who are due to retire within one year, of the order of recovery; and (iii) recovery from the employees, when excess payment has been made for a period in excess of five years, before the order of recovery is issued.

The court observed that the Petitioner held a Class-III post before her retirement and thus no recovery can be made from retirement benefits of the Petitioner on ground of excess payment of pay and allowances

With the aforesaid observations, the court disposed of the writ petition.

Case No.- WP(C) No. 532 of 2020

Case Name- Smt. W. Manileima Devi. vs State of Manipur & Ors

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Man) 3

Counsel for the Petitioner- Mr. I. Denning,

Counsel for Respondents- Mr. Th. Vashum & Mr. S. Jasobanta

Click Here To Read/Download Order