GURDEV SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Civil Misc. No. 21283 of 2004.

(2.) THE petitioner's grouse in the present case is that vide order dated 25.6.2003 (Annexure P/4) his pay was refixed and in pursuance of refixation, a sum of Rs. 1,37,431/ - came to be recoverable from him and the respondents sought to recover the same vide letter dated 2.9.2003 (Annexure P/6).

(3.) COUNSEL for the petitioner does not press the case on merits and only submits that the petitioner had been appointed way back in 1977 and would have been superannuated in all probabilities by now and at this stage to order recovery of such a huge amount is not justified. It has further been submitted that it was not a case where any misrepresentation and fraud has been alleged on the part of the employee. Therefore, reliance has been placed upon the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Budh Ram Vs. State of Haryana(1995) Supp (1) SCC 18.