• Service Law Order of recovery of excess amount passed after four years of retirement Benefit was extended to the petitioner in terms of the resolution issued by the Finance Department As such, her pay was fixed and the benefit was extended to the petitioner It is not that either employer or the employee had no knowledge about such excess payment If the employee is entitled to get certain benefit and the same was extended to her, the employer cannot absolve its liability or obligation not to pay the amount Demand for recovery of the amount from the petitioner, which was paid by the employer to the petitioner with the knowledge that the same was admissible to her, that too more than 20 years after pointing out that the same was extended wrongly, is not permissible, particularly when the petitioner has already retired from service – Excess amount sought to be recovered was not paid to the petitioner on account of any misrepresentation or fraud played on the part of the petitioner, but the same was paid as due and admissible to her and, as such, the same was with the knowledge of both the employer and the employee Impugned order set aside Writ petition allowed. [Paras 10 and 11]
Rajashree vs State of Odisha WPC 16851/22 16/01/23 [ SARANGI JJ ]
[ ORISSA HIGH COURT ]