Excess Salary Paid Due To Employer's Error 17 Years Ago Can't Be Recovered From Retiral Dues: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has held that excess salary paid to a Class-III employee because of the employer's own faulty pay fixation cannot be recovered from his post-retiral dues where the mistake is corrected 17 years later and the employee is not shown to have brought it about.Directing refund of Rs. 11,51,840/- deducted from the retiral dues of a retired Head Constable (Driver), with 7%...
The Allahabad High Court has held that excess salary paid to a Class-III employee because of the employer's own faulty pay fixation cannot be recovered from his post-retiral dues where the mistake is corrected 17 years later and the employee is not shown to have brought it about.
Directing refund of Rs. 11,51,840/- deducted from the retiral dues of a retired Head Constable (Driver), with 7% simple interest, Justice Manish Kumar Nigam held,
“In the present case, it has not been denied by the respondents that the petitioner was not responsible in any manner for alleged wrongful pay fixation. In the present case, according to the respondents, the wrong fixation of the salary of the petitioner was done in the year 2008, which has been sought to be corrected in the year 2025, after lapse of 17 years.”
The petitioner was appointed a Constable in the PAC in 1984 and was later promoted Head Constable (Driver), a Class-III post. He retired on 31st July 2025. In October 2024, respondent No. 4 sought his explanation on revision of his pay scale. He replied that he had never applied for any increase and was shortly to retire.
Rejecting that explanation, respondent No. 4 by order dated 15th February 2025 refixed his salary, bringing him down from the pay scale of Rs. 64,100/- to Rs. 56,900/- with effect from 1st July 2023, and treated Rs. 11,51,840/- as paid in excess. The petitioner challenged the retrospective refixation as arbitrary and the deduction from his retiral dues as impermissible.
The respondents said the second promotional pay scale given from 10th November 2008 and the third ACP from 10th November 2010 had been wrongly granted in the face of a punishment order dated 20th November 2006, and the impugned order only corrected the position. They added that he had given a written undertaking to refund any excess, and had not seriously challenged the refixation.
Relying on State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer), the Court noted that recovery was barred from Class-III and Class-IV employees, from those who have retired or are to retire within a year of the recovery order, and of payments spread over more than five years.
In Head Constable Prahlad Singh v. State of U.P., the Allahabad High Court had held that an undertaking given at retirement covers only wrongful computation of pension and other retiral dues, and is no consent to re-fixation from a back date.
The Court held that “the recovery of excess amount paid to the petitioner for wrong fixation of salary cannot be sustained”.
The petition was allowed in part, with a mandamus to refund the amount with 7% simple interest from the date of deduction till actual payment, within six weeks.
Case Title: Brijesh Singh Dagar v. State of U.P. and 5 others