Central Administrative Tribunal

Neelam Singh vs EXCISE DEPARTMENT on 31 December 2025

Cites 1, Cited by 0

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

1

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL JAMMU Order Sheet Item no.: 9 O.A./2115/2025 (JAMMU) [ RECOVERY ] [ SENIOR CITIZEN ] Court No.: 1 No of Adjournment: Order Dated: 31/12/2025 NEELAM SINGH Vs EXCISE DEPARTMENT

For Applicant(s) Advocate : Mr. Rameshwar Singh Jamwal For Respondent(s) Advocate : Mr. Hunar Gupta, D.A.G Order of The Tribunal (THROUGH VIRTUAL MODE) Mr. Rameshwar Singh Jamwal, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant retired in the year 1991 from the respondents department, who is now 92 years old and is fully dependent on pension for his livelihood, which was duly fixed by the competent authority without any misrepresentation or fraud on the part of the applicant. It is the grievance of the applicant that Respondent No. 4 without any application of mind has issued impugned communication dated 06.10.2025 for recovery of Rs. 4,79,662/- from the applicant on the ground of excess payment of pension, relying on circular No. DGAT/PS/DR/43 dated 08.01.2013, which as per learned counsel, is not applicable to the case of the applicant. Learned counsel further submitted the action of respondents of making recovery from applicant in the garb of impugned communication has been passed in violation of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab Vs. Rafiq Masih AIR 2025 SC 696. He prays that impugned order be stayed. Issue notices to respondents. Mr. Hunar Gupta, learned D.A.G. and Mr. Akshay Sadotra, learned counsel appear and accept notices on behalf of the respondents. List on 17.03.2025. Meanwhile, subject to objections from other side and till the next date of hearing, the operation of impugned order dated 25.10.2024 shall remain stayed qua the applicant and consequently, the respondents are directed to not effect any recovery from the applicant. Let reply be filed by the respondents by or on the next date of hearing with advance copy to learned counsel for the applicant. Pragya Sahay Saksena Member (A) Sanjeev Gupta Member (J) Arun Kumar ( ps )

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead