The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, in an Order, dated 06 June 2019. has summarised a few situations, as a ready reference, "wherein recoveries by the employers, would be impermissible in law:
(i) Recovery from the employees belonging to Class III and Class IV service (or Group C and Group D service).
(ii) Recovery from the retired employees, or the employees who are due to retire within one year, of the order of recovery.
(iii) Recovery from the employees, when the excess payment has been made for a period in excess of five years, before the order of recovery is issued.
(iv) Recovery in cases where an employee has wrongfully been required to discharge duties of a higher post, and has been paid accordingly, even though he should have rightfully been required to work against an inferior post.
(v) In any other case, where the court arrives at the conclusion, that recovery if made from the employee, would be iniquitous or harsh or arbitrary to such an extent, as would far outweigh the equitable balance of the employer's right to recover.
While directing the respondents "to pay correct scale of pay as applicable to the writ petitioner by revising the scale of pay and pension with reference to the Pay Rules and U.G.C.Regulations," the court made it clear that "the excess payment already made to the writ petitioner cannot be recovered" and if "any such amount had already been recovered, the same is to be reimbursed" the Order states.
Download Order
(i) Recovery from the employees belonging to Class III and Class IV service (or Group C and Group D service).
(ii) Recovery from the retired employees, or the employees who are due to retire within one year, of the order of recovery.
(iii) Recovery from the employees, when the excess payment has been made for a period in excess of five years, before the order of recovery is issued.
(iv) Recovery in cases where an employee has wrongfully been required to discharge duties of a higher post, and has been paid accordingly, even though he should have rightfully been required to work against an inferior post.
(v) In any other case, where the court arrives at the conclusion, that recovery if made from the employee, would be iniquitous or harsh or arbitrary to such an extent, as would far outweigh the equitable balance of the employer's right to recover.
While directing the respondents "to pay correct scale of pay as applicable to the writ petitioner by revising the scale of pay and pension with reference to the Pay Rules and U.G.C.Regulations," the court made it clear that "the excess payment already made to the writ petitioner cannot be recovered" and if "any such amount had already been recovered, the same is to be reimbursed" the Order states.
Download Order
No comments:
Post a Comment