VINOD KUMAR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Anshu Chaudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Yogendra Kumar Yadav, learned Standing counsel on behalf of the State of U.P. and perused the record.

(2.) The writ petition has been challenged on the ground that the impugned order has been passed in utter violation of principle of natural justice in as much as no notice or opportunity whatsoever was afforded to the petitioner before passing of the impugned order; that this order has been passed by ignoring the law laid down by the Apex Court as well as by this Court that once right accrues in favour of an employee, it cannot be taken away in such an arbitrary manner as has been done by the authority by the order impugned. It is stated that even if it is alleged that the employee was not entitled to it; even then the said order is against the law as it is well settled principle of law that the salary once paid to an employee cannot be recovered unless it is obtained by him by playing fraud or by misrepresentation upon the employer.

(3.) It is submitted that in the present case no such finding has been recorded by respondent no.2 in the impugned order, hence the amount paid to the petitioner in view of the order dated 11.6.2001 cannot be recovered and that in so far as the Government Order dated 13th May, 1999 is concerned, the financial and executive powers are vested in the Executive Director in so far as District Rural Development Agency, is concerned but as he had not passed the order therefore, it cannot be said to be bad on the ground that he was not empowered to grant promotional grade to the petitioner except the Commission. Even otherwise, the impugned orders are bad in law, arbitrary, unjust and illegal.