SHEO SHANKAR PRASAD Vs. BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the parties.

(2.) IN this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the letter under Memo No. 1669 dated 11.12.2000 whereby the respondents have decided to recover Rs. 64.175 = 75 from the Gratuity amount of the petitioner. The petitioner was appointed as Meter Reader in the year 1962 and was transferred to Accounts Department in 1965. In 1984 he was promoted to the post of Accountant. After serving about 36 years, petitioner retired on 31.12.1998. During the period of service, petitioner was allowed increments and other pay benefits. It was only after retirement respondents by the impugned letter dated 11.12.2000 decided to recover Rs. 64,175 = 75 from the Gratuity amount of the petitioner on the ground that he was allowed increments although he did not pass Hindi Noting and Drafting Examination.

(3.) FROM perusal of the affidavits, it appears that respondents have not made out a case that by concealment of fact or by misrepresentation the petitioner was allowed increments rather respondents on its own allowed increments before 1991 although petitioner did not pass Hindi Noting and drafting Examination. This Court in similar facts and circumstances of the case quashed such order of recovery issued by respondent/ Board against other employees.