GOPI KRISHNA DEO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, working as an Assistant Teacher in the Govt. Middle School, Sarsa, Jasidih, Deoghar, got retired on 31.12.1998. Subsequently, after six months of his retirement, a sum of Rs. 27,921/- was adjusted from the amount to be paid towards Leave Encashment and Dearness Allowances on the ground that the petitioner had drawn the said amount in excess for the period from 1.3.1989 to 31.12.1998.

(3.) According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner as soon as came to know about it, did represent his case before the respondent No. 5-District Superintendent of Education, Deoghar, stating therein that, Rs. 27,921/- had wrongly been deducted from his retiral benefits, but no decision was taken on his representation. But now a letter has been issued to the petitioner by the District Superintendent of Education, wherein the petitioner has been called upon to put forth his case against the action contemplated to be taken for revision of pension, as on account of wrong fixation of pay, the pension has wrongly been fixed on higher scale, but the authority cannot now revise the pension by taking plea that the petitioner had earlier drawn a sum of Rs. 27,921/- in excess whereby there had been wrong fixation of pay as the said fixation had been made without there being any misrepresentation on the part of the petitioner and as such the respondent was not justified in deducting the amount from retiral dues, in view of the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sahib Ram v. State of Haryana and Ors.,1995 1 SCC 18 4nd also in the case of Most. Sumitra Devi v. State of Jharkhand through Chief Engineer, Road Construction Department and Ors., 2007 4 JCR 472, and under this situation, the respondent be directed to refund he said amount to the petitioner forthwith.