HANSPAL SHEOKAND Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for the issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the order dtd. 3/7/2014 passed by the respondent No.2, thereby refixing the pay grade of the petitioner from Rs.9300.0034800+5400/- to Rs.9300.0034800+4200/- and order dtd. 11/12/2014 passed by the respondent No.2, whereby an amount of Rs.1,87,970.00 has been ordered to be recovered from the leave encashment of the petitioner.

(2.) Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as Ziledar in the Irrigation Department on 23/4/1982. He was promoted to the post of Deputy Collector in the said Department on 9/4/2010 and remained posted in State Vigilance Bureau, Panchkula on deputation as Deputy Director. On promotion to the post of Deputy Collector, the pay band of the petitioner was fixed as Rs.9300.0034800+5400/-. On 3/7/2014, the respondent No.2 informed the Director General, State Vigilance Bureau, Haryana that the pay band of the petitioner was wrongly fixed and it was conveyed that the pay band of the petitioner was to be rectified to Rs.9300.0034800+4200/-. The request was made to refix the pay band accordingly.

(3.) On 18/7/2014, the respondent No.2 made a request to the Director General, State Vigilance Bureau, Haryana to supply No Demand Certificate in respect of the petitioner as the petitioner was going to retire from Government service on 31/8/2014 on attaining the age of superannuation. In pursuance of said requirement, the office of Director General, State Vigilance Bureau informed the respondent No.2 that an amount of Rs.1,87,970.00 has been paid in excess to the petitioner during the period from 12/4/2010 to 30/6/2014 on account of wrong fixation of pay. The respondent No.2 has informed the Director General, State Vigilance Bureau on 11/12/2014 to recover the aforesaid amount from the payment of leave encashment of the petitioner. Resultantly, recovery of an amount of Rs.1,87,970.00 has been imposed on the petitioner, for which, there was no departmental enquiry conducted at any point of time before his retirement. Nothing was attributed to the petitioner in the context of fraud played by the petitioner in connivance with the official/officer of the Department. The recovery is being effected only after retirement of the petitioner, that too, without giving any show cause notice to the petitioner, explaining his position as regards fixation of pay band, if any, on wrong facts.