S.N.GANGULY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner prayed for the refund of Rs. 1,56,469/- which has been recovered from the petitioner's gratuity amount on the allegation that petitioner, who was incharge of one cycle stand, got the cycle stand coupons printed from a private press namely M/s. Mithila Art Press without authority and without permission of a competent officer.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was never given any intimation that the procedure adopted by the petitioner is not in accordance with any of the rules. It is further submitted that the petitioner deposited the entire amount with the authorities and, thereafter, the authority, in particular Senior Divisional Accounts Officer, Chakradharpur, issued the cheques in the name of M/s. Mithila Art Press on three occasions. This fact was brought on record by the petitioner which has been taken note of by the officer of the department itself in its order dated 10.02.2009 which was passed in compliance of the order passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Circuit Bench, Ranchi dated 24.10.2008 in OA No. 151 of 2008. It is also submitted that the recovery sought from the petitioner is of the year 2001 to 2005 and petitioner retired in the year 2006.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that Rule 15 of the Railway Service (Pension) Rules, 1993 provides for recovery of any ascertained amount from the dues payable by the railway to its employee. It is also submitted that petitioner was warned that he should not get the coupons printed directly, still the petitioner went on printing the coupons directly and making payments to the press.