1.
A
Petitioner’s Affidavit
contains “Grounds” and “Averments” because the petitioner is asking the
court for relief.
The petitioner says: “These are the
facts (Averments), and these are the reasons why I am entitled to relief
(Grounds).”
2.
A
Counter Affidavit
is a Responsive Pleading, it consists of denial/admission, the official
version, annexures, and refutation.
The respondent does NOT file
“Grounds”, do not state why you want relief, because you are not
asking for relief. You are asking for dismissal. Therefore, the Averments are the
official facts presented by the department, and the “Grounds” are
converted into the Refutation of the Petitioner’s Claims (which form the
basis for requesting dismissal).
CASE 1: Salary Not Paid for Three Months
(Junior Auditor)
1. Averments
(Official Facts Sworn by the Department)
“The petitioner’s salary for April, May, and June 2024 was withheld because he failed to submit his Service Register and Attendance Register. The office issued letters dated 05.05.2024 and 10.06.2024 directing him to submit the registers. The petitioner submitted them only on 15.07.2024. The salary was processed on 20.07.2024, and the amount was credited to his bank account on 22.07.2024.”
Why this is an Averment: It is a pure statement of official facts. The department is swearing to the dates of the letters, the dates of submission, and the date of processing, supported by official records.
2. Grounds
(Refutation of Petitioner’s Claims)
Why this serves as the “Ground”: It provides the official justification (basis) for the department’s action. It refutes the petitioner’s grounds and establishes why the department’s action was justified.
CASE 2: Wrong Deduction
of GPF (Record Assistant)
1. Averments
(Official Facts Sworn by the Department)
Why this is an Averment: It relies on official registers (GPF Register) and specific documents (application, notice) to establish the factual truth of what happened.
2. Grounds
(Refutation of Petitioner’s Claims)
Why this serves as
the “Ground”: It
directly attacks the factual basis of the petition and provides the official
reason why the petition is false.
CASE 3: Pension Not
Released After Retirement (Office Subordinate)
1. Averments
(Official Facts Sworn by the Department)
“The petitioner’s pension papers were not processed initially because the Service Book and GPF ledger extract were missing. Letters dated 20.05.2024 and 25.06.2024 were issued requesting these documents. The petitioner submitted the documents on 10.08.2024. The pension papers were put up for audit verification on 12.08.2024. The delay after 12.08.2024 was due to the office being closed for annual audit.”
Why this is an Averment: It gives a detailed chronological account of the administrative process and the dates of document submission.
2. Grounds
(Refutation of Petitioner’s Claims)
“The petitioner’s claim that all documents were submitted on time is false, as the Service Book and GPF ledger extract were submitted only on 10.08.2024. The delay was solely caused by the petitioner’s failure to submit the necessary records.”
Why this serves as the “Ground”: It shifts the responsibility for the delay to the petitioner and refutes the claim of prompt submission.
CASE 4: Recovery from
Pay Bill – Alleged Excess Payment (Junior Auditor)
1. Averments
(Official Facts Sworn by the Department)
“The Pay Bill Register for May 2024 shows that the petitioner was paid Rs. 5,000/- in excess due to an incorrect pay fixation. A show-cause notice dated 05.06.2024 was issued to the petitioner explaining the excess payment. The petitioner submitted his reply on 15.06.2024. After considering the reply, the recovery was effected in the June 2024 pay bill.”
Why this is an Averment: It relies on official records (Pay Bill Register, show-cause notice, reply) to establish the factual sequence of events.
2. Grounds
(Refutation of Petitioner’s Claims)
Why this serves as the “Ground”: It validates the procedural validity of the department’s action and refutes the petitioner’s claim of procedural irregularity.
CASE 5: Seniority Not
Updated in Service Register (Record Assistant)
1. Averments
(Official Facts Sworn by the Department)
Why this is an Averment: It states the factual basis for the seniority revision (deputation inclusion) and the procedural steps taken (notice, objections).
2. Grounds
(Refutation of Petitioner’s Claims)
“The contention that the seniority was revised without notice is false, as the notice dated 15.02.2024 was issued and the petitioner submitted his objections. The seniority was revised only after following due process and considering his objections.”
Why this serves as the “Ground”: It establishes that the department followed the principles of natural justice (notice and objection) before taking administrative action.
CASE 6: Audit Objection
on TA Bill (Junior Auditor)
1. Averments
(Official Facts Sworn by the Department)
Why this is an Averment: It relies on the TA bill and audit objection to state the facts of the disallowance.
2. Grounds
(Refutation of Petitioner’s Claims)
Why this serves as the “Ground”: It provides the official justification for the disallowance and refutes the claim that no reason was given.
Final Focus (Counter
Affidavits):
|
Case |
Averments
(Official Facts) |
Grounds
(Refutation of Petitioner’s Claims) |
|
1.Salary |
Withheld
due to missing registers; letters issued on 05.05 & 10.06; registers
submitted 15.07. |
Claim
of “no communication” is false; withholding was for verification, not
absence. |
|
2.GPF |
Deduction
revised based on petitioner’s application dated 15.03.2024; notice issued
01.07.2024. |
Claim
of “no application” is false; deduction was as per his own request. |
|
3.Pension |
Delayed
due to missing Service Book/GPF extract; letters issued 20.05 & 25.06;
documents submitted 10.08. |
Claim
of “timely submission” is false; delay caused solely by the petitioner. |
|
4.Recovery |
Pay
Bill Register shows excess; show-cause notice issued 05.06; reply received
15.06. |
Claim
of “no notice” is false; recovery was made after due process. |
|
5.Seniority |
Two
seniors added back; notice issued 15.02.2024; objections considered before
revision. |
Claim
of “no notice” is false; revision was done after following due process. |
|
6.TA Bill |
Original
ticket not produced; audit objection dated 20.05.2024 records the reason. |
Claim
of “no written reason” is false; disallowance was as per TA Rules. |
Important: When drafting a Counter Affidavit:
1. Do not write
“Grounds” like a petitioner. You are not asking for relief; you are
asking for dismissal.
2. Use Averments
to tell the department’s factual story, relying strictly on registers, files,
and official records.
3. Use the Refutation
section (which acts as your Grounds) to tear down the petitioner’s claims
by pointing out the exact factual and procedural discrepancies.
4. Never include
legal arguments
(like quoting case laws or Articles) in the Counter Affidavit. Keep it strictly
to facts, official records, and procedural compliance.
*****
T. Mallikarjuna Prasad
Trainer | Facilitator | Consultant
Department of Personnel &
Training
Government of India
