KALUSINH HALUSINH SOLANKI Vs. SATHAMBA GRAM PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN all these writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners now the ex -employees of Respondent No.1 (Gram Panchayat) having common prayers to direct the respondents not to recover the excess amount from the salary of the petitioners and to continue to pay salary due from the relevant date and further execution, implementation and operation of the recovery pursuant to the impugned notice issued by the competent authority be also quashed and and set aside and stayed.

(2.) THE petitioners in all these writ petitions were appointed against sanctioned establishment and resolution was passed by Gram Panchayat.

(3.) HOWEVER , during pendency of these writ petitions initially learned Single Judge stayed further recovery of the amount from the salary of each of the petitioners and later on Civil Application No.8064 of 2005 in Special Civil Application NO. 7253 of 2055, Civil Application No.806 of 2005 in Special Civil Application No. 7251 of 2005 and Civil Application No. 8065 of 2005 in Special Civil Application No.7260 of 2005, the opponent No.1 -Gram Panchayat was directed to pay salary to each of the applicants for the month of August and September, 2005 and further salary of each of the applicants to be paid every month regularly and according to leaned advocate appearing for the Gram Panchayat till all the petitioners came to be superannuated they were paid salary in terms of the above order passed by the learned Single Judge. It is also submitted that in the affidavit -in -reply filed by Secretary of Gram Panchayat/Talati, the above fact is stated on oath along with circumstances in which the salary was initially fixed and later on when audit objections were raised notice was issued by the authority.