KIRAN SRIVASTAVA Vs. ALLAHABAD BANK AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties through V.C.

(2.) The instant application has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner praying therein the following reliefs:-

(3.) The facts of the case lie in narrow compass. The husband of the petitioner was working in Road Construction Department as an Assistant and had retired on 01.02.1996 and he was getting his pension and other admissible benefits vide P.P.O. No. 226508. On 08.04.2001 the husband of the petitioner died and thereafter, the petitioner was getting family pension to the tune of Rs. 12,898/- till December, 2008 when the respondent-Bank suo motu without giving any notice or show cause started disbursing amount of Rs.9,745/- towards the pension account. Due to the aforesaid reason petitioner made an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005, seeking information as to why her pension has been slashed down without assigning any reason. Pursuant to that vide letter dated 16.08.2010 (Annexure-4 to the writ application) bank informed the petitioner that she was entitled for pension to the tune of Rs. 9,745/- only and due to inadvertence she was getting Rs.12,898/-, as such, a total sum of Rs.2,19,193/- excess payment has been given to her and the same is being recovered. The said letter further indicates that Rs.1,80,213/- has to be recovered in 51 installments at the rate of Rs.3500/- per month and Rs.1713/- in the 52nd installment. At this stage, it is pertinent to mention here that no show cause or any short of notice was ever given to the petitioner before the process of recovery was started by the respondent-Bank.