High Court overturns decision to recover JKCA remunerations from ex-cop
Srinagar, Sep 15: The High Court of J&K and Ladakh has set aside the Central Administrative Tribunal’s decision whereby it had upheld the government's order of recovering from pension remunerations received by former police officer Sudershan Mehta from Jammu & Kashmir Cricket Association (JKCA) as its joint secretary.
Mehta, a retired officiating Deputy Superintendent of Police had challenged the CAT’s verdict in a plea before the High court.
“The impugned judgment to the extent it upholds the action of the respondents (authorities) for recovery of remuneration received by the petitioner (Mehta) from JKCA from his pension vide Government Order No.403-Home of 2022 dated 16.11.2022 is quashed and set aside, “a division bench of Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Justice Sanjay Parihar said, while allowing Mehta’s plea.
In 2015, the police headquarters J&K received information that Mehta had been working as Joint Secretary in the JKCA simultaneously while working in the police department without obtaining prior permission of the Government as mandated under Rule 21(2) of the Jammu & Kashmir Government Employees (Conduct) Rules, 1971.
It also came to the notice of police headquarters that Mehta was receiving an amount of Rs.12,000 per month as honorarium for performing his duties as Joint Secretary in JKCA. Eventually, the government in terms of its order dated November 16, 2022 directed recovery of the remunerations Mehta had taken from JKCA as its Joint Secretary, from his pension.
Mehta assailed the government’s order before the tribunal, that on June 28, last year upheld the action of the authorities in recovering remuneration received by Mehta from JKCA from his pension.
However, the tribunal allowed Mehta’s prayer for his regularization as DySP and issued necessary directions for considering his case for regularization with effect from the date he was entitled to be promoted as DySP along with his other counterparts, including grant of selection grade of DySP with all consequential benefits.
The Government did not choose to assail the directions, which were passed against it and, therefore, accepted the judgment passed by the tribunal.
The court said that a retired person like Mehta could not be subjected to departmental proceedings for the misconduct which such an employee had committed during the period he was in service.
“It is beyond pale of any discussion that Rules 30 and 33 to 35 of the Rules of 1956, which deal with disciplinary proceedings and the punishments that can be imposed on conclusion thereof, do not envisage the conduct of disciplinary inquiry into the misconduct of a delinquent employee after his superannuation,” the bench said. “This is so because the competent authority is not empowered to inflict any of the penalties envisaged under Rule 30 of the Rules of 1956 upon a person, who has ceased to be a member of service”.
The Court noted that resultantly the government Order dated 16.11.2022 imposing recovery of the amount Mehta had received from JKCA as remuneration or honorarium was clearly in violation of the principles of natural justice and, therefore, could not sustain.
Underscoring that there was merit in Mehta’s plea, the court accordingly allowed the same. It quashed the tribunal’s judgment to the extent it upheld the action of the government for recovery of remuneration received by the Mehta from JKCA from his pension.
