CHANDIGARH, MAY 27
The Haryana Government has decided that monitoring of court cases would be carried out by members of State Accounts Subordinate (SAS)cadre, posted in Departments, Boards and Corporations, to minimise litigation.
While stating this here today, Finance Minister, Capt. Abhimanyu, said that following this decision, after the receipt of notice of the Court in civil suit or civil writ petition, the matter would be examined by the members of SAS cadre posted in Departments, Boards and Corporations in light of provisions of service rules, instructions or litigation policy applicable in the case. Members of SAS cadre, after detailed examination with regard to claim of the petitioner, would give their comments alongwith relevant provisions of service rules applicable in that case.
He said that it had come to the notice of the Finance Department that in some cases, erroneous benefit contrary to the provisions of service rules was given to government employees either by the officials or officers of the Department, which had been approved by the members of SAS cadre or given on the advice of members of SAS cadres.
He said that according to the orders of the Supreme Court, excess amount could not be recovered in the case of recovery from employees belonging to Class-III and Class-IV service, or Group ‘C’ and Group ‘D’ service. Similarly, excess amount could not be recovered in case of recovery from retired employees, or employees who are due to retire within one year, of the order of recovery. It could not be recovered in the case of recovery from employees, when the excess payment has been made for a period in excess of five years, before the order of recovery is issued. Also, excess amount could not be recovered in the case of 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. Similarly, it could not be recovered 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.
He said that in view of this position, the State had no other option but to fix the responsibility of officers or officials of the Department, if they are responsible for erroneous benefit, of the members of SAS cadre, if they are responsible for erroneous benefit, alongwith the recovery of total amount from them, because there was loss to State exchequer, which is public money and misuse of public money in this manner could not be permitted.
He said that it had also come to the notice of the Department that in some cases, the right of government employees accrues under the provisions of service rules is not given by the officers or officials of the Department or on the advice of members of SAS cadre. The Department concerned was not competent to stop any benefit at their own level which has been accrued under the provisions of service rules or government instructions. If there is any ambiguity in the language of service rules or government instructions, in that eventuality, the matter may be referred to Finance Department seeking clarification immediately without any delay. After adopting this procedure, the litigation on these subjects would be minimised.
He said that to achieve the object of minimising litigation in future, if it is found that the said procedure has not been followed by the officers and officials of the Department or by the members of SAS cadre, the responsibility of officers and officials concerned of the Department or the members of SAS cadre would be fixed under the provision of Rule 7 of the Punishment and Appeals Rules, 1987.
He said that in all the cases wherein provisions of service rules or government instructions of Pay Revision Branch, Pension Branch or FR Branch are involved, written statement could not be filed by the Department without the approval of the Finance Department.
A written communication to this effect has been sent to all Heads of Departments, he added.
===balbirsingh227@gmail.com
The Haryana Government has decided that monitoring of court cases would be carried out by members of State Accounts Subordinate (SAS)cadre, posted in Departments, Boards and Corporations, to minimise litigation.
While stating this here today, Finance Minister, Capt. Abhimanyu, said that following this decision, after the receipt of notice of the Court in civil suit or civil writ petition, the matter would be examined by the members of SAS cadre posted in Departments, Boards and Corporations in light of provisions of service rules, instructions or litigation policy applicable in the case. Members of SAS cadre, after detailed examination with regard to claim of the petitioner, would give their comments alongwith relevant provisions of service rules applicable in that case.
He said that it had come to the notice of the Finance Department that in some cases, erroneous benefit contrary to the provisions of service rules was given to government employees either by the officials or officers of the Department, which had been approved by the members of SAS cadre or given on the advice of members of SAS cadres.
He said that according to the orders of the Supreme Court, excess amount could not be recovered in the case of recovery from employees belonging to Class-III and Class-IV service, or Group ‘C’ and Group ‘D’ service. Similarly, excess amount could not be recovered in case of recovery from retired employees, or employees who are due to retire within one year, of the order of recovery. It could not be recovered in the case of recovery from employees, when the excess payment has been made for a period in excess of five years, before the order of recovery is issued. Also, excess amount could not be recovered in the case of 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. Similarly, it could not be recovered 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.
He said that in view of this position, the State had no other option but to fix the responsibility of officers or officials of the Department, if they are responsible for erroneous benefit, of the members of SAS cadre, if they are responsible for erroneous benefit, alongwith the recovery of total amount from them, because there was loss to State exchequer, which is public money and misuse of public money in this manner could not be permitted.
He said that it had also come to the notice of the Department that in some cases, the right of government employees accrues under the provisions of service rules is not given by the officers or officials of the Department or on the advice of members of SAS cadre. The Department concerned was not competent to stop any benefit at their own level which has been accrued under the provisions of service rules or government instructions. If there is any ambiguity in the language of service rules or government instructions, in that eventuality, the matter may be referred to Finance Department seeking clarification immediately without any delay. After adopting this procedure, the litigation on these subjects would be minimised.
He said that to achieve the object of minimising litigation in future, if it is found that the said procedure has not been followed by the officers and officials of the Department or by the members of SAS cadre, the responsibility of officers and officials concerned of the Department or the members of SAS cadre would be fixed under the provision of Rule 7 of the Punishment and Appeals Rules, 1987.
He said that in all the cases wherein provisions of service rules or government instructions of Pay Revision Branch, Pension Branch or FR Branch are involved, written statement could not be filed by the Department without the approval of the Finance Department.
A written communication to this effect has been sent to all Heads of Departments, he added.
===balbirsingh227@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment