LAKSHMI NARAYAN MUKHOPADHYAY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals by special leave are directed against the judgment of the central administrative tribunal, Calcutta bench dated 24.2.1995 and 29.6.1995 in o. A. No. 1170/93 and review petition in m. A. No. 117/95 respectively.

(2.) The appellant was employed in the ministry of railways as inspector of works, in-charge. He voluntarily retired from service on 30. 11.1991. Since the post-retirement benefits were not paid to him in full, he approached the tribunal. The tribunal on perusal of the record produced by the respondents held that the appellant, inspector of works supplied to contractors excess of material and a sum of Rs. 49,536/- was recoverable from the appellant's gratuity amount. The impugned order dated 24.11.1992 was upheld.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the tribunal has erred in law inasmuch as this amount was arrived at by the respondent without giving opportunity to the appellant. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Union of India has contended that by letter dated 12.6.1991 the appellant was asked to explain and thereafter, the Divi. RIy. Manager (Engg. ) by letter dated 24.11.1992, i. e. , after the voluntary retirement of the appellant, directed that the amount should be recovered from the amount of gratuity of the appellant. We extract below the relevant part of the letter which was produced before the high Court.