SOHAN LAL SHARMA Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner has prayed for quashing of Office Order Annexure PA with further prayer that the Respondents may be directed not to make recovery from the salary of the Petitioner on account of alleged overpayment made to him on the basis of Annexure PB.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that Petitioner joined Himachal Pradesh Government, Directorate of Health Services on 26.07.1970 as Medical Officer. The Petitioner was drawing his basic pay of Rs.4,500/ - plus NPA in the revised pay scale on 31.12.1995 in the pay scale of Rs.3,000 -4,500/ -. The Petitioner was placed in the revised pay scale of Rs.14,300 -18,150/ - vide Annexure PB as on 31.03.2000. The pay of the Petitioner in the revised scale was fixed at Rs.15,100/ - on 01.01.1996 and ultimately Rs.16,800/ - plus 25% NPA as on 31.3.2000.

(3.) THE Petitioner in accordance with the Office Order Annexure PA is shown to have been drawn over payment with effect from 01.01.1996. The Petitioner is not required to refund the amount allegedly paid in excess. The Petitioner should have been given chance to show cause as to why he should not be re -fixed at Rs.14,300/ - plus NPA instead of Rs.15,100/ - plus NPA. The Office Order Annexure PA of recovery is wrong, illegal and against Rule 7 of H.P. Civil Services (Pay Revision) Rules, 1998. The Officer Order Annexure PA was issued without any show -cause notice which is against the spirit of law. The re -fixation done vide Office Order Annexure PA is punitive and, therefore, is not sustainable.