JOYRAM DAS Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. K. Nath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. D. Sarkar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

(2.) The case of the petitioner in brief is that the petitioner has retired as the Office Superintendent and he was entitled to get all the retiral benefits. But from the sum, accounted for encashment of the unutilized Earned Leave for 300 days which is calculated at Rs.6,74,700.00, a sum of Rs.2,73,918.00 has been deducted by the respondents on the ground that the petitioner had unlawfully drawn the said amount as reimbursement of medical expenses for his wife.

(3.) Mr. K. Nath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was entitled to the said reimbursement and accordingly, he was paid that amount but at the time of making payment of his retiral benefits, from the leave encashment, the said amount was deducted as the internal audit raised objection in respect of the payment of the said amount. The audit note [covered by the letter dtd. 1/8/2017, Annexure-D to the reply filed by the respondents] has been placed by the respondents and it appears that during scrutiny of the Cash Book, Bill Register, Sanction Memo(s), Cheque issue Register, MR Register and other relevant records for the period covered by the audit, it revealed that the petitioner along with others had drawn the medical reimbursement bills on different occasions beyond the scope of the relevant rules/ the government policy in this regard. The auditors have advised the respondent-corporation to rescrutinized the reimbursement bills and to take the appropriate steps regarding recovery of the inadmissible medical reimbursement. Accordingly, the deduction has been made.