Appendix II - Recovery of Payments | KartavyaDesk
Original Rule Text
“10. In view of the afore-stated constitutional mandate, equity and good conscience, in the matter of livelihood of the people of this country, has to be the basis of all governmental actions. An action of the State, ordering a recovery from an employee, would be in order, so long as it is not rendered iniquitous to the extent, that the action of recovery would be more unfair, more wrongful, more improper, and more unwarranted, than the corresponding right of the employer, to recover the amount. Or in other words, till such time as the recovery would have a harsh and arbitrary effect on the employee, it would be permissible in law. Orders passed in given situations repeatedly, even in exercise of the power vested in this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, will disclose the parameters of the realm of an action of recovery (of an excess amount paid to an employee) which would breach the obligations of the State, to citizens of this country, and render the action arbitrary, and therefore, violative of the mandate contained in Article 14 of the Constitution of India.”
What This Means
Appendix II of the Delegation of Financial Powers Rules, 1978, specifically Rule 10, deals with the recovery of excess payments made to government employees. It essentially states that the government can recover overpaid amounts, but this recovery must be fair and just. The rule emphasizes that the recovery should not be so harsh that it causes undue hardship or is considered arbitrary and unfair to the employee. The underlying principle is to balance the government's right to recover public funds with the employee's right to a fair livelihood, as enshrined in the Constitution.
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.
Key Points
- •Government can recover excess payments made to employees.
- •Recovery must be fair and not cause undue hardship.
- •The action should not be arbitrary or violate Article 14 of the Constitution (right to equality).
- •The employee's livelihood must be considered.
- •The recovery should not be more unfair than the employer's right to recover the amount.
Practical Example
Mr. Sharma, a clerk in the Ministry of Finance, was mistakenly paid ₹10,000 extra per month for six months due to a clerical error. Upon discovering the error, the department issued a recovery order for ₹60,000. Mr. Sharma, who is the sole earner in his family and has significant medical expenses, appealed the order, arguing that a lump-sum recovery would cause severe financial hardship. The department, considering his circumstances, decided to recover the amount in smaller, more manageable installments of ₹2,000 per month over 30 months. This approach ensured the recovery of public funds while minimizing the financial burden on Mr. Sharma, aligning with the principles of fairness and equity outlined in Appendix II, Rule 10.
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can the government always recover excess payments?▼
What factors are considered when deciding on a recovery plan?▼
What if the recovery causes severe financial hardship?▼
Does this rule apply to all government employees?▼
What is Article 14 of the Constitution and how does it relate to this rule?▼
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.
Test Your Knowledge
Question 1 of 3
According to Rule 10 of Appendix II of the Delegation of Financial Powers Rules, 1978, what is the primary consideration when the government seeks to recover an excess payment made to an employee?
Related Rules
Need help understanding this rule?
Ask Niti — your AI assistant for DFPR 1978 and other government rules