HARDEV SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for recovery of a princely sum of Rs.4000/- which were admittedly recovered from the employee during his period of service. The petitioner retired on 30.04.2010 as a Junior Assistant and a period of 9 years has passed since then. Admittedly, the petitioner only approached this Court for the first time by filing Civil Writ Petition No.11470 of 2018 in which directions were issued on 08.05.2018 to pass a speaking order which have been duly complied with by passing order dated 14.06.2018 (Annexure P-6), which is also subject matter of challenge.

(2.) Apparently, a stale cause of action was got revived by approaching this Court. The Apex Court in Civil Appeal No.2425 of 2019 The Government of India and another versus P.Venkatesh has held that such directions issued for deciding the representation and reviving the stale cause is not justified. The same reads as under:-

(3.) The present case is classic example of such stale claim which has been got revived by the directions which have been issued and thus speaking order has come for which cause of action had allegedly arisen to the petitioner during his service. A perusal of the impugned order would also go to show that the amount of Rs.4,000/- was deducted in 8 installments during service tenure of the petitioner pertaining to the period of 1.8.98 to 31.1.2000. It was always open to the petitioner as such to agitate during his service period at that point of time against the recovery which has been effected.