THAMBU RAM Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the present petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 26.03.2014, through which Rs. 4,08,439/- are sought to be recovered from him, which amount was paid by the Government as back wages while complying with the order of this Court, through which reinstatement of a labourer had been ordered, whose services had been ordered to be terminated by the petitioner while he was in service, as Block Incharge of the Forest Department, Government of Haryana.

(2.) The uncontroverted facts, which have emerged from the record and after hearing counsel for the parties are that way back in the year 2001, when the petitioner was serving the respondents as a Block Incharge, he had ordered the termination of a labourer namely Satpal son of Shri Leela Ram, who had challenged his termination by making a claim before the Labour Court, which was dismissed. Thereafter, aforesaid Satpal challenged the Award of the Labour Court through a writ petition filed in this Court being C. W. P. No. 3900 of 2009, which, vide order dated 08.05.2012, was allowed, directing the respondents to reinstate him in service with back wages. In compliance with the order of this Court dated 08.05.2012, back wages amounting to Rs. 4,08,439/- were paid to him. Through the impugned order, the amount paid to aforementioned Satpal is sought to be recovered from the petitioner on account of wrongful termination of his services by the petitioner in the year 2001.

(3.) The event, on the basis of which, the impugned recovery is sought to be made from the petitioner, pertains to the year 2001. The petitioner retired from service on 31.01.2009 and the impugned order has been passed on 26.03.2014. Thus, the impugned recovery is sought to be made by way of a penalty, after over five years of the petitioner's retirement, on the basis of an event, which took place 13 years before the passing of the impugned recovery order and about eight years prior to the petitioner's retirement.