ups_00419 — When recovery of excess payment is to be effected, opportunity is to be afforded to the affected party and applicability of judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Rafiq Masih to be examined

When recovery of excess payment is to be effected, opportunity is to be afforded to the affected party and applicability of judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Rafiq Masih to be examined — This chunk pertains to a case (O.A. No. 260/00475 of 2017) concerning an employee's Time Related Continuity Allowance (TRCA), who was initially receiving TRCA at the slab of ₹ 1,740-30-2,640 but had ... — Facts: The Applicant was appointed as EDDA (GDSMD), Lenkudipada BO in August, 1991 and, he was entrusted the additional duty of GDSMC, Lenkudipada BO. While he was drawing Time Related Continuity Allowance (in short, TRCA) at the slab ₹ 1,740-30-2,640 as on 31-12-2005, revision, to TRCA was made and, according to him, as per this revision, his TRCA was correctly replaced in the revised TRCA slab of ₹ 4,220-75-6,470 and he was disbursed 40% of the arrears by 31-10-2009 and rest 60% was paid subsequently after the stipulated date for verification of correctness of fixation of TRCA. In October, 2011, his TRCA was reduced to the slab of ₹ 3,330-60-5,130 and recovery sought to be effected @ ₹ 1,000 per month from the TRCA of the Applicant from the month of January, 2012. In terms of 2004 guidelines issued by the DG (Posts), if a GDS employee is found short of workload compared to his rate of TRCA, at the first instance attempt should be made to combine the duties of other post as a measure to rationalization and where combination of duty is not feasible, the GDS may be brought from the 2nd TRCA to 1st TRCA by protecting the stage of 1st TRCA. It is submitted that reduction of TRCA on the workload statistics collected during the year 2010 for the period of 2005 when no record for the said year of 2005 was available being weeded out, is bad. To justify his stand, he has made a chart in the OA showing the workload statistics. Representation by the Applicant having been rejected, this OA was filed. Counter has been filed by the Respondents opposing the case of the Applicant. It was inter alia stated that cent per cent verification was conducted as on 1-1-2006 to ascertain the TRCA for each on the basis of the workload and excess payment recovered. In the instant case, the workload of the Applicant being found to be 3 hour and 41 minutes, including the additional work of GDSMC, TRCA was fixed in the scale of ₹ 3,330-60-5,130 and excess payment made to the Applicant between 1-1-2006 to 30-9-2009 was detected to the tune of ₹ 1,745 only, which was decided to be recovered. Thus, Respondents prayed for dismissal of O.A. During hearing, Learned Counsel for the Applicant referred to similar matter, in O.A. No. 469 of 2017, reduction of TRCA on a similar ground was challenged and this Tribunal allowed the OA with direction

(a) By following the law and DoP&T order, recovery is declared as bad in law and the Respondents are directed the return the recovered amount within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this order,

(b) The Respondents shall reverify the workload statistics once again to redetermine Applicant's TRCA after giving due opportunity to the Applicant in this regard.