BHAKRA BEAS MANAGEMENT BOARD Vs. BALVIR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BALBIR Singh (Respondent No. 1 herein) was allowed proficiency step up increment vide order dated 23.06.1999 and was further allowed to get 2nd such increment after completion of 16 years of service, which was granted to him on completion of requisite period of service. But, vide notice dated 18.01.2008 (Annexure P7 attached with the Civil Writ Petition), he was called upon to show cause as to why the amount so paid to him be not recovered. His reply to the show cause notice was found to be unsatisfactory, therefore, vide order dated 26.02.2008, an amount of Rs. 24,299/ - paid as excess was ordered to be recovered from him in monthly installments of Rs. 1,000/ - each. He approached this Court by way of CWP No. 5825 of 2008 which has been allowed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 04.12.2013.

(2.) TO challenge order dated 04.12.2013, Bhakra Beas Management Board has filed the instant Letters Patent Appeal.

(3.) IT is argued by the learned counsel that the 1st respondent was allowed to draw the increment after completion of 16 years of service, inadvertently, as regulations of the appellant -Board do not permit any such increment to its employees, the learned Single Judge has committed an error by restraining the appellant -Board from effecting recovery of the amount of Rs. 24,299/ - from the 1st respondent, even though, the said respondent is not entitled to retain that amount. To support this contention, learned counsel relies upon Chandi Prasad Uniyal and others Vs. State of Uttrakhand and others, : 2012(8) SCC 417.