JIBAN BALA SIKDER Vs. INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petitioner was an employee of the respondent bank. The bank paid her a permanent personal allowance (P.P.A.) from 17th September 1993. She was paid Rs. 970/- per month. This was a result of a settlement between the bank and its employees.

(2.) She retired after 30th April 2006. She was entitled to gratuity of Rs. 3,50,000/. On 19th May 2006 a letter was written by the Head Office of the Bank in Chennai to their Manager in Howrah. It said that the writ petitioner ought to have been paid Rs. 562/-instead of Rs. 970/-. The excess amount may be recovered. This is the dispute in the matter, not the amount, but the right to recover. This excess payment was provisionally calculated at once by the bank. On 07.06.2006 by a letter they instructed release of Rs. 2,50,000/- out of Rs. 3,50,000/- to the writ petitioner, withholding the balance Rs. 1,00,000/-. This withholding was provisionally recovery of the allegedly excess P.P.A. allowance paid. In March, 2007 a further sum of Rs. 50,000/- was paid. Therefore, Rs. 50,000/- was withheld.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the writ petitioner as well as the bank have taken me in detail through the above facts.