Sri Kunchok Tempa vs HOME AFFAIRS

1

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
GUWAHATI BENCH

Original Application No. 70/2025
HON’BLE MR RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
Sri Kunchok Tempa
S/o Late Tsering Thendup,
Assistant Central Intelligence Officer-I (Retired)
Resident of- Village- Tenzingsgaon,
P.O. Kalatkang, District- West Kameng,
Arunachal Pradesh Pin — 793002
Phone- 9863741520
Email- [email protected]
--Applicant
-vs-

1. Deleted vide order dated 15.05.2026
2. The Director,
Intelligence Bureau,
Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA),
Government of India, North Block,
New Delhi 110 001.

3. The Deputy Director,
Subsidiary Intelligence Bureau,
Ministry of Home Affairs,
Government of India,
P.O. — R.K. Mission,
Itanagar Arunachal Pradesh.
PIN Code- 791113.

4. Regional Pay and Accounts Officer (IB),
Ministry of Home Affairs,
High Stand, Laitumkhrah,
Shillong Meghalaya,
PIN Code- 793003
---Respondents

O.A. No/70/2025
Digitally signed by
NENGDEILHEN SINGSIT
NENGDEILHEN SINGSIT

2

Present:
For applicant(s): Sri S. Nath
Ms. R. Bharali

For respondents: Sri A.Kundu, Addl. CGSC

Date of hearing: 05.08.2026 Date of Order:10.08.2026

ORDER

PER: RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER :
This application has been preferred to seek the
following relief:
“8.1. That the Hon’ble Tribunal be pleased to declare that the
respondents are not entitled to withheld Rs. 1,59,900/- out of the
admissible gratuity of the applicant as stated in PPO No.
234082300862 dated 27.10.2023.
8.2. The Hon’ble Tribunal be pleased to direct the respondents to
refund back the recovered amount of gratuity of Rs. 1,59,900/- to
the applicant with interest @ 12% p.a.
8.3. Any other relief or reliefs as the Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit
and proper, including the cost of the case.”

2. Applicant joined as Security Assistant in the
respondent department on 20.12.1989 and retired on
superannuation on 31.10.2023 as Assistant Central
Intelligence Officer- I (a Group ‘C’ post). He is aggrieved
O.A. No/70/2025
Digitally signed by
NENGDEILHEN SINGSIT
NENGDEILHEN SINGSIT

3

with the impugned order of recovery of Rs. 1,59,900/- out of
the admissible gratuity of Rs. 13,33,167/- as stated in the PPO
No. 234082300862 dated 27.10.2023.
3. Sri S. Nath, learned counsel for the applicant
submits that, the respondents vide Circular dated 24.07.2019
issued an order regarding decision for grant of Hardship
Allowances, Tough Location Allowance (TLA) and Ration
Money Allowances (RMA), Special Duty Allowances (SDA)
and Special Compensatory Allowances (SCA) to the
officials of SBI, Itanagar as they are posted at hard and
tough location. Accordingly, the Group ‘C’ employees
including the applicant was granted and paid TLA of Rs.
1,59,900 while he was in service. The applicant retired on
30.04.2024.
3.1. That after his retirement, the respondents issued an
order for recovery of Rs. 1,59,900/- from his gratuity. This
recovery from gratuity of the applicant has been done
behind his back without any notice or show cause and
affording him any opportunity of being heard, which is
O.A. No/70/2025
Digitally signed by
NENGDEILHEN SINGSIT
NENGDEILHEN SINGSIT

4

violative of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the
State of Punjab & Others v. Rafiq Masih [(2014) 8 SCC 883 ]
and DoPT OM dated 06.02.2014, 02.03.2016 and 03.10.2022.
The applicant has submitted a representation on 05.10.2024
to refund back the recovered amount of Rs. 1,59,900/- but
to no result.
4. Respondents in their reply have stated that a
Circular dated 24.07.2019 was issued regarding allowances
to be granted to the officials posted in the State of
Arunachal Pradesh. In the same circular, it was also
specified that an undertaking was to be given by the
employee that overpayment, if any, made towards these
allowances would be refunded as and when demanded
and the applicant had given his undertaking and accepted
the allowances.
4.1 That, the excess dues, if any, can be adjusted
against the amount of the retirement gratuity payable to
the retiree in terms of Rule 71 of CCS (Pension) Rules.
O.A. No/70/2025
Digitally signed by
NENGDEILHEN SINGSIT
NENGDEILHEN SINGSIT

5

4.2. That, show case notice was given to the Applicant
vide dispatch No. 83 dated 13.01.2023 regarding the
recovery of overpayment of inadmissible TLA. Furthermore,
vide Memorandum dated 02.09.2020 while discontinuing
payment of Tough Location Allowance/TLA it had been
notified that in case higher/additional allowances have
been paid same should be recovered. The recovery of
Rs.1,59,900/- out of gratuity was made in compliance with
GOI orders as well as to submit the compliance report to
IAW (MHA).
4.3. According to respondents retired as ACIO-I/Exe
which is Group-B post and his contentions that he is a Group
B is denied by them.
5. Sri A. Kundu, learned counsel for the respondents
submits that the Honble Apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 3500
of 2006 in the case of High Court of Punjab & Haryana &
Ors. - Versus- Jagdev Singh held that the situations cannot
be applied where the officer to whom the payment was
made in the first instance was clearly placed on notice that
O.A. No/70/2025
Digitally signed by
NENGDEILHEN SINGSIT
NENGDEILHEN SINGSIT

6

any payment found to have been made in excess would
be required to be refunded. According to respondents, the
recovery of inadmissible TLA was made to submit a
compliance to Para-5 of Audit report carried out by IAW
(MНА).
6. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and
learned counsel for the respondents and perused the
pleadings.
7. It is observed that the matter pertains to Hardship
Allowance which was given wrongly to the applicant. As
per the circular issued on 24.07.2019 from the Cremo
Itanagar (AD/E) to all BIPs of SIB Itanagar, All Branches at SIB
Hqrs, Itanagar, wherein it was stated that it has been
decided to grant Hardship Allowance (HAS) (as per
category ‘B’ & ‘C’ alongwith Tough Location Allowance
(TLA) & Ration Money Allowance (RMA) in lieu of Special
Duty Allowance (SDA) & Special Compensatory Allowance
(SCA) (old rate) to the officials of SIB Itanagar.” Also was
included a proforma for undertaking for willing officers with
O.A. No/70/2025
Digitally signed by
NENGDEILHEN SINGSIT
NENGDEILHEN SINGSIT

7

that “Over payment, if any, towards these allowances
would be refunded as and when demanded.” Applicant
gave his undertaking and accepted the allowances
(Annexure R/8 of reply). Thereafter, Audit objection was
raised that he has been drawing HSA, RM alongwith TLA and
in terms of that, the excess amount was recovered from his
gratuity and the applicant has challenged that recovery in
this O.A.
8. Applicant had signed the undertaking (Annexure
R/8) with a sound mind and he had accepted the
allowance knowing fully well that, over payment, if any,
towards those allowances are to be recovered as and
when demanded. He is bound by estoppel of law.
Therefore, there is no reason to interfere in the impugned
order of recovery.
9. Accordingly, the O.A is dismissed. No costs.


(RAJINDER SINGH DOGRA)
MEMBER (J)
SS

O.A. No/70/2025
Digitally signed by
NENGDEILHEN SINGSIT
NENGDEILHEN SINGSIT