VIJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged order dt. 3/10/2018, issued by respondent no. 3, in terms whereof, recovery has been ordered of an amount of ?44,522/- from the petitioner on the ground of excess payment in terms of the observations raised by an Audit Inspection Party during 2014-15 in para-4 thereof and office order dt. 30/12/2016, in terms whereof, the petitioner wrongly received the benefits of new ACPS w.e.f. 1/10/2012, whereas as per the Government instructions dt. 29/5/2014, the category of Technicians had already been granted three tier pay scales.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner has argued that the impugned act of the respondents is not sustainable in the eyes of law as the petitioner being a Class-III employee and further it not being the case of the Department that the excess payment was made to the petitioner on account of any misrepresentation etc. made by him or any fraud having been committed by him, the recovery was impermissible as per the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in State of Punjab and others Versus Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and others (2015) 4 SCC 334.

(3.) Mr. Pranay Pratap Singh, learned Additional Advocate General has argued that there was no infirmity in the impugned order as it was a matter of record that the excess payment stood made to the petitioner, to which he was not entitled to, therefore, the Department was justified in effecting recovery thereof.