#excess payment

Patna HC upheld CAT's quashing of ₹4.87 lakh recovery from a railway employee granted premature MACP upgradation due to departmental error. The court ruled excess pay cannot be recovered absent employee misrepresentation, placing the burden of administrative mistakes on the department. This reinforces protection for government servants against financial liability for errors in pay fixation.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that the state cannot recover excess pension payments made more than five years prior to retirement when it failed to finalize pension accounts as mandated by Rule 74 and the 2015 circular. This ruling protects retired government servants from retrospective financial demands arising from administrative negligence, reinforcing the principle that procedural compliance is non-negotiable in pension matters.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has barred recovery of excess pension payments made more than five years after retirement, holding that delayed verification under Rule 59 and failure to issue NOC within one month of retirement extinguishes the state’s claim. This ruling reinforces the Rafiq Masih principle that administrative delays cannot be used to impose retrospective financial burdens on retirees, protecting thousands of government pensioners from arbitrary clawbacks.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that recovery of excess pension beyond five years post-retirement violates the Rafiq Masih precedent, reinforcing protections for retired government servants against arbitrary financial demands. The judgment mandates strict adherence to pension finalization timelines under the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976.

Bombay High Court holds that recovery of excess pay from retired employees is impermissible under Supreme Court guidelines in Rafiq Masih, even if pay was erroneously fixed.