JAI PARKASH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court with prayer for quashing order dated 20.62006 (P-3) on the ground that the order is patently against the law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in case Commissioner and Secretary to Government of Haryana & ors. v. Ram Sarup Ganda & ors. Civil Appeal No. 20264/2004 decided on 2.8.2006 and State of Haryana v. Partap Singh and others, 2007 1 RSJ 6 SC . The petitioner on attaining the age of superannuation has retired from the post of SS Master. On account of some error, he was granted ACP as well as one extra increment. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to him on 20.6.2006(P-3) and accordingly, his pay was refixed and recovery was ordered in pursuance to the aforementioned order and a sum of Rs. 56,134/- from the amount of Gratuity has been withheld.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out from the judgment aforementioned that if upon revision of the pay-scales, any employee is liable to refund any amount, the Government should not insist on refund of such amount. Even otherwise Hon'ble the Supreme Court has held in the case of Sahib Ram v. State of Haryana, 1995 1 SCT 668 . No recovery can be effected in the absence of any misrepresentation or fraud on the part of the concerned employee in obtaining the beneficial orders. Accordingly, Mr. Chatrath states that he would not challenge the orders in so far as the refixation is concerned but the recovery part be set aside by directing the respondents to pay the withheld amount of gratuity.

(3.) Mr. Rathee learned State counsel could raise any plausible objection to the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.