National 8 of 12
National Judiciary Law & Courts Polity & Governance

Supreme Court says the precedents barring recovery of excess payments never considered Section 72 of the Contract Act

A Supreme Court bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sheel Nagu observed in Dr MK Ravi Varma etc etc v. National Institute of Technology and Ors that not a single precedent has remarked on the applicability of Section 72 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 to the recovery of excess payments. The Court said the reasoning in Chandi Prasad Uniyal appears to draw on that provision without citing it, and that the line of cases following Sahib Ram and Shyam Babu Verma, decided under Article 142, does not have the force of binding precedent. On the facts, Academic Grade Pay granted around October 2009 was withdrawn in January 2010, the teachers had signed undertakings agreeing to recovery if pay fixation was erroneous, and the appeals were dismissed. The judgment is reported as 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 1019.

Bench: Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sheel Nagu Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 1019
Why it matters for exams: Service-law recovery cases and the Sahib Ram-Rafiq Masih line are repeatedly examined in polity and law papers.
Kerala PSCUPSC
20 October 2026 Source: LiveLaw

In plain words

Article 142 Constitution of India — It lets the Supreme Court pass any order needed for complete justice in a case before it.

On a phone, swipe left or right to move between stories.