Quashes Recovery of Excess Pension and Impose Cost on Central Government – PH HC
In a significant ruling, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh delivered a judgment on May 5, 2023, quashing the recovery of excess pension from a retired army personnel. The case, bearing the number CWP-20457-2019 (O&M), involved petitioner Kashmir Singh versus Union of India and others.
The bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri presided over the case and heard arguments from Mr. Sumit Dua, the advocate representing the petitioner, and Ms. Sonia Sharma and Mr. Naren Partap Singh, advocates appearing for respondents No. 1 and 2 and respondent No. 3 respectively.
The petitioner, who had served in the Indian Army as a Sepoy and retired in 1974, had been receiving a regular pension since April 1, 1979. However, in May 2019, the petitioner’s pension was substantially reduced and recovery of the excess amount was sought to be made at a rate of Rs. 3500 per month. The petitioner contended that the reduction and recovery were effected without providing him an opportunity of hearing or a show-cause notice, and were in violation of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) etc., 2015(4) SC 334.
During the proceedings, the petitioner’s counsel argued that the recovery part was being challenged, and not the re-fixation of the pension. They emphasized that the recovery, after 50 years of the petitioner’s retirement, went against the principles established in the aforementioned Supreme Court judgment.
The respondents, represented by their respective advocates, submitted that the petitioner’s pension was erroneously fixed as a service pensioner instead of a reservist pensioner due to a mistake in the computer system. They acknowledged the mistake and stated that the recovery was justified based on the detection of overpayment to the petitioner.
After considering the arguments, the bench opined that the recovery from the petitioner fell under Category-(i) and (ii) as outlined in the Supreme Court judgment. The court held that recovery from Category-C and D employees, as well as retired employees, is impermissible. Consequently, the court restrained the respondent-Union of India from making any further recovery and ordered the refund of the amount already recovered, along with interest at 6% per annum to be paid within three months. If the payment was delayed beyond the stipulated period, the interest rate would increase to 9% per annum.
Additionally, taking into account the petitioner’s age and the violation of the law, the court awarded costs amounting to Rs. 25,000, which were to be paid within three months.
Date of Decision: 05.05.2023
Kashmir Singh vs Union of India and others
