news details |
|
|
| HC decides law point in pension case | | | EARLY TIMES REPORT
JAMMU, Nov 21: Deciding a law point, Justice Mansoor Ahmed Mir of J&K High Court Jammu Wing, has held that the authority wrongly fixing pay and pensionary beneficiary has no jurisdiction to recover excess amount and reduce the pension.
Quashing the order impugned in so far as it relates to the recovery of excess amount of pay and reducing the pension of the petitioner from Rs 2832 to Rs 2070, the court directed respondents to pay the pension to the petitioner @ Rs 2832 per month instead of Rs 2070 as per the last pay drawn by the petitioner and release pensionary benefits accordingly and report compliance.
This landmark judgment was delivered in a petition filed by one retired employee Mahmood Beigh, whose monthly pension was reduced from Rs. 2832 to Rs.2097 and was made liable to pay Rs 49000 excess amount with interest. Feeling aggrieved by the said order dated October 1, 2002; petitioner filed this petition through Adv SK Anand challenging the order on various grounds.
Justice Mir, while deciding the law point involved in this petition, observed that this matter is pending in this Court for the last more than 2 years despite the fact that matter relates to retrial benefits of petitioner. The core question for consideration is whether respondents are within their power and jurisdiction to hold and say that the pay fixation was wrongly done, thereby recovery has to be affected and pension has to be accordingly fixed. During the course of arguments Adv SK Anand appearing for the petitioner submitted that it is nowhere averred that the petitioner has fixed the pay on his own or he had any role play while making the pay fixation, the respondents have wrongly fixed the pension and have wrongly assessed the retrial benefits while holding that the pay of the petitioner was wrongly fixed. The counter of the department is too cryptic and virtually the averments made in the petition have not been denied by the department.
Justice Mir further observed that the pay was fixed by the department at least a decade ago thus respondents are not within their powers to fix the pension by reducing the last pay drawn by the petitioner. Article 242 of J&K CSR governs the subject and as per its mandate the average emoluments in respect of the Government servant are to be taken into consideration on the basis of last 10 months pay and pension other benefits are to be fixed accordingly. The fixation had been done a decade ago, thus the respondents were under legal obligation to fix the pension as per the pay last drawn by the petitioner. If the department has done the fixation wrongly that cannot be attributed to the petitioner in any way, referred various judgments and allowed the petition JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
