Jammu, Jan 06: In O.A./2115/2025 titled NEELAM SINGH Vs EXCISE DEPARTMENT after hearing a bench of Pragya Sahay Saksena Member (A) Sanjeev Gupta Member (J) ordered as under:-
Mr. Rameshwar Singh Jamwal, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant retired in the year 1991 from the respondents department, who is now 92 years old and is fully dependent on pension for his livelihood, which was duly fixed by the competent authority without any misrepresentation or fraud on the part of the applicant.
It is the grievance of the applicant that Respondent No. 4 without any application of mind has issued impugned communication dated 06.10.2025 for recovery of Rs. 4,79,662/- from the applicant on the ground of excess payment of pension, relying on circular No. DGAT/PS/DR/43 dated 08.01.2013, which as per learned counsel, is not applicable to the case of the applicant.
Learned counsel further submitted the action of respondents of making recovery from applicant in the garb of impugned communication has been passed in violation of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab Vs. Rafiq Masih AIR 2025 SC 696.
He prays that impugned order be stayed.
Issue notices to respondents. Mr. Hunar Gupta, learned D.A.G. and Mr. Akshay Sadotra, learned counsel appear and accept notices on behalf of the respondents.
List on 17.03.2025.
Meanwhile, subject to objections from other side and till the next date of hearing, the operation of impugned order dated 25.10.2024 shall remain stayed qua the applicant and consequently, the respondents are directed to not effect any recovery from the applicant.
Let reply be filed by the respondents by or on the next date of hearing with advance copy to learned counsel for the applicant.
|