Add Tribune As Your Trusted Source
TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
UPSC | Exam ScheduleExam Mentor
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | ChinaUnited StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My Money
News Columns | Straight DriveCanada CallingLondon LetterKashmir AngleJammu JournalInside the CapitalHimachal CallingHill ViewBenchmark
Don't Miss
Advertisement

HC rules no recovery from pension without consent

Says abrupt deductions undermine economic dignity

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that recovery of excess payment cannot be carried out from a retired government employee’s pension without his express written consent.

Advertisement

Justice Harpreet Singh Brar also asked Reserve Bank of India to issue instructions to all agency banks that “no recovery of excess amount from the pension of a government employee shall be effected without the pensioner’s knowledge and consent, or without the issuance of a prior notice.”

Advertisement

The assertions and the direction came as the Bench described abrupt deductions a blow to the “economic dignity and emotional stability” of post-retirement life.

The ruling came in a case where Rs 6,63,688 was deducted from a retired employee’s personal bank account and the transaction was marked as “recovery of excess pension”.

The Bench was assisted on the petitioner’s behalf by advocates Raman B Garg, Mayank Garg and Navdeep Singh.

Advertisement

Justice Brar observed “abrupt recovery of pension without the knowledge of the pensioner, even if administratively justified, produces consequences far beyond the legal sphere.” The court added that such action “undermines the very object of providing pension to the retired employees, i.e. to secure the economic dignity and emotional stability in the post-retirement stage of life.”

Referring to the immediate financial distress caused to pensioners, Justice Brar asserted: “The predetermined plans on the basis of legitimate expectation of a certain amount of pension suddenly become unfeasible. Moreover, pensioners often depend entirely on their monthly pension to meet essential household and medical expenses.”

Justice Brar added sudden deductions disturbed their financial equilibrium and might lead to “inability to meet healthcare needs or other basic expenses.”

Advertisement
Tags :
excess paymentPension
Show comments
Advertisement