P C WADHWA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This second appeal has been filed by the defendant against the judgement and decree dated 20th July, 1976 of the Additional District Judge, Chandigarh.

(2.) Briefly the facts are that in pursuance of advertisement dated 20-8-1951 issued by the Punjab Public Service Commission, Simla, for the post of Stipendiary Probationers for the Superior Forest Course at the Indian Forest College, Dehra Dun, the defendant applied and was selected by the Commission. He joined the Forest Department for preliminary practical training on 20-11-1951 and underwent the training until 17th March, 1952. On completion of the training he joined the Indian Forest College at Dehra Dun on 1st April, 1952. After successful completion of the training, he was to be appointed as PFS Class I Officer. It is averred that according to the conditions of the advertisement, the selected candidates were required to sign an agreement to the effect that they would serve the Department for not less than 5 years and in case they failed to do so, they would refund all the monies spent by the Government on their training and education. The bond, however, could not be got signed from the defendant.

(3.) In September, 1952, he left the College without sanction of the Government and joined the Central Police Training College at Abu as he had been selected in I.P.S. The defendant was requested to return the amount of Rs. 3250/- spent by the plaintiff on him but he did not do so. Thereafter the Government started deducting the amount from the pay of the defendant who had by then joined the service as an I.P.S. Officer. He resisted the recovery of the amount and instituted a suit for declaration that the Government was not entitled to deduct the amount from his salary which was decreed by the trial Court on 21st June, 1960. An appeal by the State against that decree was dismissed. The State came up in second appeal to this Court which was withdrawn considering that the remedy of the State was by way of a Civil suit. Consequently it instituted a suit for recovery of Rs. 3,250/- against the defendant.