Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 2369 (RAJ)

Sampatidevi v. State Bank of India

2017-11-01

SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

body2017
JUDGMENT & ORDER : SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J. The issue is not more res-integra. 2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the recovery proceedings of an amount of Rs. 60118/- allegedly to have been wrongfully paid to her as excess of pension amount. 3. It is submitted that the petitioner is an illiterate woman getting family pension on account of death of her husband. She was receiving family pension of Rs. 1998/- per month for almost 10 years but after the said period, recovery has been directed to be made from her account. It is also submitted that a letter was got signed by the pension authorities from the petitioner with the assurance that no recovery shall be made but actually, the letter, which was got signed from her, was to allow the respondents to deduct Rs. 500/- per month from monthly pension of the petitioner which she had never intended. 4. The recovery proceedings were stayed by this Court while issuing notice and admitting the writ petition vide order dated 01/09/2008. 5. After hearing counsel for both the parties, this Court finds that the respondents have been able to satisfy this Court that the pension was wrongfully calculated of the petitioner. However, keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih : (2015) 4 SCC 334 and considering that the petitioner is a widow of a Class IV employee and is merely an illiterate woman, it would be appropriate to quash the recovery proceedings and further that the excess amount paid to the widow having been paid to her without her personal fault or in absence of any fraud committed by her, the order of recovery dated 31/05/2008 is quashed and set aside. The respondents are restrained from making any recovery from the petitioner. However, the petitioner would be entitled to the revised pension as fixed now. Any amount, which has been recovered prior to passing of the interim order by this Court, may also be released. 6. The writ petition stands partly allowed in the terms as indicated above.