LexSTATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. versus RAFIQ MASIH (WHITE WASHER)
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2014] 8 S.C.R. 228 STATE OF PUNJAB & ·ORS. v. RAFIQ MASIH (WHITE WASHER) (Special Leave Petition (C) No.11684 of 2012 ETC.) JULY 08, 2014 [H.L. DATIU, R.K. AGRAWAL AND ARUN MISHRA, JJ.] SERVICE LAW: Recovery of dues mistakenly paid to employee - A C Division Bench of Supreme Court observing apparent difference of opinion in Shyam Babu Verma and Saheb Ram Verma, on the one hand, and Chandi Prasad Uniyal, on the other, referring the appeals to three Judge Bench - Held: The observations made in Shyam Babu Verma and Saheb Ram D Verma not to recover the excess amount paid to employee were in exercise of extra-ordinary powers under Art. 142 of the Constitution of India which vests the power in Supreme Court tg pass equitable orders in the ends of justice - Whereas, in Chandi Prasad Unival's case, a specific issue was raised and E canvassed and the Court after taking into consideration various decisions, laid down the law that even if by mistake of employer amount is paid to employee and on a later date if employer after proper determination of the same discovers that excess payment is made by mistake or negligence, the F excess payment so made could be recovered - Thus, the law laid down in Chandi Prasad Uniya/'s case, no way conflicts with the observations made in the other two cases -- The Court is, therefore, of the considered opinion that the reference was unnecessary and, as such, without answering the same, the G matters are sent back to the Division Bench for its appropriate disposal - Constitution of India, 1950 - Arts. 136 and 142. CONSTITUTION OF /NOIA, 1950: Arts. 136 and 142 - Scope of the ·two provisions and H 228 STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. v. RAFIQ MASIH (WHITE 229 WASHER) difference between - Explained - Held: Distinctively, although A the words employed under Art. 136 and Art. 142 speak of the powers of Supreme Court, the former vests a plenary jurisdiction in Supreme Court in the mater of entertaining and hearing of appeals by granting special leave against any judgment or order made by a court or tribunal in any cause B or matter - The powers under Art. 136 are plenary to the extent that they are paramount to the limitations under the specific provisions for appeal contained in the Constitution or other laws - It is a corrective jurisdiction that vests a discretion in Supreme Court to settle the law clear -- It makes the law c operational to make it a binding precedent for the future instead of keeping it vague -- Thus, it declares the law, as under Article 141 of the Constitution -- Art. 142, on the other hand, is the exercise of jurisdiction to pass such enforceable decree or order as is necessary for doing 'complete justice' 0 in any cause or matter - Art. 142 is supplementary in nature and cannot supplant the substantive provisions -- The directions issued under Art. 142 do not constitute a binding precedent unlike Art. 141 - Service law. Shyam Babu Verma and Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. E 1994 (1) SCR 100 = (1994) 2 sec 521 and Sahib Ram Verma v. State of Haryana 1994 Suppl. (3) SCR 674 = (1995) Supp. 1 sec 18 and on the other hand, in Chandi Prasad Uniyal and Ors. v. State of Uttarakhand & Ors. 2012 (7) SCR 307 = (2012) 8 SCC 417 - referred to. F Prem Chand Garg v. Excise Commissioner, U.P. 1963 Suppl. SCR 885 = AIR (1963) SC 996; Naresh Shridhar Mirajkar v. State of Maharashtra, (1966) 3 SCR 744; A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak 1988 (1) Suppl. SCR 1 = (1988) 2 G SCC 602 Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India 1998 (2) SCR 795 = (1998) 4 SCC 409; Ramakant Rai vs. Madab Rai 2003 (4) Suppl. SCR 17 = 2003 (12) sec 395; Union of India v. Kamai/ Singh 1994 (5) Suppl. SCR 587 = (1995) 2 SCC 728; Indian Bank v. ABS Marine Products (P) H A B c D E F G 230 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 8 S.C.R. Ltd. 2006 (1) Suppl. SCR 52= 2006 5 SCC 72, Ram Pravesh Singh v. State of Bihar 2006 (6) Suppl. SCR 512 = (2006) 8 , SCC 381 and in State of U.P. v. Neeraj Awasthi 2005 (5) Suppl. SCR 906 = (2006) 1 sec 667 - relied on. Case Law Reference: 1994 (1) SCR 700 referred to para 1 1994 (3) Suppl. SCR 674 referred to para 1 2012 (7) SCR 307 referred to para 1 1963 Suppl. SCR 885 relied on para 9 (1966) 3 SCR 744 relied on para 9 1988 (1) Suppl. SCR 1 relied on para 9 1998 (2) SCR795 relied on para 9 2003 (4) Suppl. SCR 17 relied on para 10 1994 (5) Suppl. SCR 587 relied on para 10 2006 (1) Suppl. SCR
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.