LAWS(CHH)-2013-4-34

RAMJIT SAI Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Decided On April 26, 2013
Ramjit Sai Appellant
V/S
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally .

(2.) The relevant factual matrix necessary for decision of the petition are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Teacher on 17-3-64. Upon attaining the age of superannuation, the petitioner retired w.e.f. 31-3-10 after rendering service of about 36 years. After almost two years of his retirement, the impugned letter has been issued on 15-2-12 directing the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs. 2,24,899 (Annexure F/1) stating that amount is found to be paid in excess between the period from 1-1-86 to 31-3-10 upon scrutiny of the service book.

(3.) Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has been subjected to great hardship as the petitioner was a low paid employee and on the basis of pay fixation done from time to time by the respondent authorities, salary was paid to him. Further submission is that the petitioner is not guilty of any fraud or misrepresentation. Throughout his service, he was getting pay in various pay scales which were revised from time to time by respondents according to their own understanding and computation of pay and pay scale. The petitioner had no basis to believe that whatever is being paid to him is in excess or that he is not entitled to those payments. On a bona fide belief of proper pay fixation, the petitioner kept on receiving salary as an Assistant Teacher ever since his appointment in the year 1964 but after two years of his retirement, all of a sudden, the authorities have again undertaken the exercise of the pay fixation that too from the year 1986. Therefore, present is a case of exceptional nature as the petitioner is a low paid Assistant Teacher and whatever, he could get in the shape of gratuity, leave encashment etc., all would be adjusted against the so called recovery of huge amount of Rs. 2,24,899/-. It is further submitted that action of the respondents is without affording any opportunity of hearing.