22-WP-4026-2024(C).doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4026 OF 2024 Dinkar S/o Krishna Shinde ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and Others ...Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 4298 OF 2024 Gopal S/o Shivgonda Vanmarathe ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and Others ...Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 4300 OF 2024 Rangrao S/o Shripati Kamble ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and Others ...Respondents —————— Mr. Paras D. Yadav a/w Mr. Chetan Sharma i/by Satyaki Law Associates, for the Petitioners. Mr. Tushar Sonawane (Through V.C.) for the Respondent Nos.2 to 4 – MJP. Mr. A. A. Alaspurkar, AGP for the Respondent-State in WP/4026/2024. Ms. Tejas J. Kapre, AGP for the Respondent-State in WP//4298/2024. Mr. P. V. Nelson Rajan, AGP for the Respondent-State in WP//4300/2024. —————— CORAM : SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH & NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ. DATE : SEPTEMBER 07, 2026. Jamadar-SL 1 of 5 2026:BHC-KOL:8630-DB 22-WP-4026-2024(C).doc P. C. : 1. These groups of Petitions raise identical issues and hence are being decided by this common order. 2. In Writ Petition No.4026 of 2024, the Petitioner was appointed as a Mukadam with the Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran on 1st February, 1988 and came to be promoted in due course as a Junior Clerk. He superannuated on 31st May, 2022. By order dated 19th September, 2022, while calculating the retirement benefits, the Pradhikaran has deducted/withheld a sum of ₹2,00,000/- on the ground of incorrect pay- scale being granted. 3. Similarly, in Writ Petition No. 4298 of 2024, by order dated 23rd September, 2022, while calculating the retirement benefits, a sum of ₹4,71,239/- was deducted/withheld by the Pradhikaran. 4. In the third Writ Petition No.4300 of 2024, the Petitioner superannuated on 31st July, 2022 and while calculating his retirement benefits before his date of superannuation, by order dated 13th July, 2022, a sum of ₹1,35,788/- came to be deducted/withheld from the retirement benefits. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners submits that the Petitioners are Class-III / Class-IV employees. He submits that the amounts were withheld on the ground of incorrect pay scale granted during the service tenure of the Petitioners, which is now sought to be Jamadar-SL 2 of 5 22-WP-4026-2024(C).doc recovered. He submits that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab and Others v. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and Others1. He submits that in view thereof, the impugned orders are clearly unsustainable and are liable to be quashed and set aside. 6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran would support the impugned orders. He submits that as incorrect pay scale was granted to the Petitioners, which came to the notice of the Pradhikaran only at the time of calculation of the retirement benefits, the excess amount was withheld from the amount of gratuity. He submits that as the Petitioners were not entitled to the said pay-scale which came to be granted inadvertently, the order has been rightly passed of withholding the excess amount. He submits that no interference is warranted as it is not demonstrated that a correct pay scale was granted to the Petitioners. 7. We have considered the submissions and perused the record. 8. There is no dispute about the fact that the Petitioners have superannuated and from their retirement benefits, the excess amount on account of an incorrect pay scale being granted during the service tenure is now sought to be withheld by the Pradhikaran. 1 (2015) 4 SCC 334 Jamadar-SL 3 of 5 22-WP-4026-2024(C).doc 9. The issue is no longer res integra and is well settled by the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab and others v. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and others (supra). The Hon’ble Apex Court laid down five factors while recovering the excess amount paid by employer to employee during service tenure, which are reproduced as under: “18. It is not possible to postulate all situations of hardship which would govern employees on the issue of recovery, where payments have mistakenly been made by the employer, in excess of their entitlement. Be that as it may, based on the decisions referred to hereinabove, we may, as a ready reference, summarise the following few situations, wherein recoveries by the employers, would be impermissible in law : (i) Recovery from the employees belonging to Class III and Class IV service (or Group C and Group D service) (ii) Recovery from the retired employees, or the employees who are due to retire within one year, of the order of recovery. (iii) Recovery from the employees, when the excess payment has been made for a period in excess of five years, before the order of recovery is issued. (iv) Recovery in cases where an employee has wrongfully been required to discharge duties of a higher post, and has been paid accordingly, even though he should have rightfully been required to work against an inferior post. (v) In any other case, where the court arrives at the conclusion, that recovery if made from the employee, would be iniquitous or harsh or arbitrary to such an extent, as would far outweigh the equitable balance of the employer’s right to recover.” 10. As the Petitioners' case is squarely covered by the decision in the case of State of Punjab and Others v. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and others (supra), the act of the Pradhikaran in recovering the excess payment on the basis of an incorrect pay scale during the service tenure of the Petitioners cannot be sustained. The Petitioners are entitled to Jamadar-SL 4 of 5 22-WP-4026-2024(C).doc refund of the amounts which have been deducted by the Pradhikaran from the retirement benefits of the Petitioners. 11. Resultantly, the Petitions are allowed in terms of prayer Clauses (I) (II) and (III). 12. The amounts to be refunded within a period of four weeks from the date of this order. 13. The Petitions are allowed in the above terms. [NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.] [SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.] Jamadar-SL 5 of 5