Recovery of excess pension payments from a retired employee is impermissible absent fraud or misrepresentation.

The petitioner, a retired Work Inspector, sought a direction for refund of ₹71,021 deducted from his pension under the respondents’ circular dated 25 May 2015.

He claimed the recovery was illegal and sought interest at 18% until repayment.

Relying on a co-ordinate Bench decision concerning recovery from similarly placed employees, he invoked State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and Thomas Daniel v. State of Kerala.

The respondents opposed the petition.

1. Whether recovery of ₹71,021 from the petitioner’s pension was impermissible because he was a retired employee

2. Whether the petitioner was entitled to repayment of the amount recovered and, if so, on what terms

Under Article 226 of the Constitution, the High Court may grant relief against recovery of excess payments where recovery would be inequitable or harsh.

In State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih (White Washer), the Supreme Court identified recovery from retired employees, among other categories, as impermissible in law.

Thomas Daniel v. State of Kerala followed that protection and affirmed that recovery from a retired employee may be unjustified where the excess payment resulted from the employer’s error rather than the employee’s misrepresentation or fraud.

The Court also relied on the co-ordinate Bench decision applying those principles to refund amounts recovered from pension.

The Court considered the co-ordinate Bench’s decision directly applicable and held that the governing principles in Rafiq Masih and Thomas Daniel resolved the recovery issue.

Applying the protection for retired employees, it concluded that the amount deducted from the petitioner’s pension should be refunded.

The order does not grant the claimed 18% interest; instead, it provides for 10% annual interest if repayment is not made within the prescribed period.

The respondents were directed to refund the amount recovered from the petitioner’s pension within six weeks from the date of the order.

If they failed to do so, the refundable amount would carry interest at 10% per annum from the date of recovery.