TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (7) TMI 1352
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 18536, 18527, 18526, 18525, 18524, 18535, 18628, 18630, 18767, 18784, 18805, 18802, 18796, 18769, 18857, 18834, 18960, 19116, 19236, 19527, 19590, 19552, 19556, 19580, 19594, 19597, 19599, 19601, 19663, 19727, 19864, 19837, 20024, 20022, 20048, 20291, 20454, 20794, 20891, 21915, 22256, 22255 and 22257 of 2011, CC Nos. 133, 178, 434, 887, 1147, 1166, 1168, 1188, 1200, 1291, 1303, 1306, 1391, 1596, 1637, 1644, 1657, 1653, 1739, 1869, 1864, 1928, 1935, 2209, 2818, 2798, 2821, 2832, 6093, 6483, 6604, 6659, 6800, 6829, 10109, 12769, 13044, 13114, 13300 of 2012, CC Nos. 2335 and 6861 of 2013, CC No. 3626 of 2014, S.L.P. Nos. 30473, 33651 and 35876 of 2011, S.L.P. No. 30751, 6692, 4822, 11690, 11702, 11693, 11694, 11697, 11699, 11703, 11704, 11705, 11706, 11709, 11707, 11710, 11712, 26386, 26388, 26389, 26391, 26306, 26307, 26308, 28655, 28812, 28813, 28814, 28816, 28815, 28818, 28817, 28823, 28819, 28824, 28825, 28827, 28828, 28829, 33343, 33345, 30246, 33347, 33350, 33348, 33352, 33353, 33354, 33356, 35328, 37149, 37151, 37152, 37153, 37154, 39202, of 2012 S.L.P. No. 21554, 15307, 519, 523, 524, 13023, 11072, 11068, 11069, 15852, 5765, 5821, 5753, 5810, 5838, 5751, 9907, 9909, 9912, 99....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....herein were not entitled to the higher pay scales, had come to the conclusion that since the amount has already been paid to the Petitioner, for no fault of theirs, the said amount shall not be recovered by the Respondent-Union of India. The observations made by this Court in the said case are as under: Although we have held that the Petitioners were entitled only to the pay scale of Rs. 330-480 in terms of the recommendations of the Third Pay Commission w.e.f. January 1, 1973 and only after the period of 10 years, they became entitled to the pay scale of Rs. 330-560 but as they have received the scale of Rs. 330-560 since 1973 due to no fault of theirs and that scale is being reduced in the year 1984 with effect from January 1, 1973, it shall only be just and proper not to recover any excess amount which has already been paid to them. (Emphasis supplied) 6. In Sahib Ram Verma's case (Supra), this Court once again held that although the Appellant-therein did not possess the required educational qualification, yet the Principal granting him the relaxation, had paid his salary on the revised pay scale. This Court further observed that this was not on account of misrepresenta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ike negligence, carelessness, collusion, favouritism, etc. because money in such situation does not belong to the payer or the payee. Situations may also arise where both the payer and the payee are at fault, then the mistake is mutual. Payments are being effected in many situations without any authority of law and payments have been received by the recipients also without any authority of law. Any amount paid/received without the authority of law can always be recovered barring few exceptions of extreme hardships but not as a matter of right, in such situations law implies an obligation on the payee to repay the money, otherwise it would amount to unjust enrichment. 16. The Appellant in the appeal will not fall in any of these exceptional categories, over and above, there was a stipulation in the fixation order that in the condition of irregular/wrong pay fixation, the institution in which the Appellants were working would be responsible for recovery of the amount received in excess from the salary/pension. In such circumstances, we find no reason to interfere with the judgment of the High Court. However we order that excess payment made be recovered from the Appellants salary i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....siduary power, it is extraordinary in its amplitude, its limits when it chases injustice, is the sky itself". Article 136 of the Constitution of India was legislatively intended to be exercised by the Highest Court of the Land, with scrupulous adherence to the settled judicial principle well established by precedents in our jurisprudence. Article 136 of the Constitution is a corrective jurisdiction that vest a discretion in the Supreme Court to settle the law clear and as forthrightly forwarded in the case of Union of India v. Karnail Singh (1995) 2 SCC 728, it makes the law operational to make it a binding precedent for the future instead of keeping it vague. In short, it declares the law, as Under Article 141 of the Constitution. 11. Article 142 of the Constitution of India is supplementary in nature and cannot supplant the substantive provisions, though they are not limited by the substantive provisions in the statute. It is a power that gives preference to equity over law. It is a justice oriented approach as against the strict rigors of the law. The directions issued by the court can normally be categorized into one, in the nature of moulding of relief and the other, as the d....