Indradeo Vishwakarma vs The State of Jharkhand and Others

Alok Singh, J.—Petitioner was working as a jeep driver in the Forest Department. Vide impugned order dated 21.12.2004, he was asked to refund Rs. 1,40,387/- saying it has been wrongly paid to him, by wrongly fixing salary on the higher side. It is further provided in the impugned order that, if petitioner fails to pay the amount in one go, same shall be recovered from his salary. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, I do not find any material on record or any mention in the impugned order to the'' effect that petitioner has ever played any fraud, misrepresentation or role in fixing his salary on the higher side, for which, he was not entitled for.

On being asked as to whether petitioner has played any fraud or misrepresentation or role in getting the excess amount, learned counsel for the respondents has clearly stated that no fraud or misrepresentation was ever played by the petitioner and excess salary was being paid to the petitioner for years together since by mistake, higher salary was fixed by the Department.

Hon''ble Apex Court in the case of Syed Abdul Qadir and Others Vs. State of Bihar and Others, has clearly ruled that if the employee has not played any misrepresentation or fraud in getting the excess amount and payment of excess amount was made by wrong interpretation or by invoking wrong provisions by the employer, and mistake was not detected at the earliest, recovery should not be allowed to be made from the employee.

In view of the above settled position of law, no recovery can be ordered from the petitioner in the absence of any proof of fraud or misrepresentation on the part of the petitioner. Therefore, present writ petition is allowed. The impugned order is hereby, quashed. No order as to cost.