R.C. LAKHANPAL Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners, who are retired officers of the Department of Horticulture, Himachal Pradesh, being aggrieved by orders of deduction of different sums of money from their Death cum Retiral Gratuity (DCRG), one of which is at Annexure P -10, ostensibly on the ground that the benefit of higher pay scales on completion of 8 and 18 years service were wrongly granted in their favour albeit the fact that they had not passed the departmental examination uptill the age of 50 years, where after passing of such examination was not a mandatory pre -requisite.

(2.) THE petition has been filed on the following substantive prayer: -

(3.) CONSEQUENTLY , benefit of higher scale was extended in favour of petitioner No. 3, Sh. K.S. Katoch vide pay fixation statement Annexure P -2, dated 31.5.1993. Similar pay fixation statements qua other petitioners have also been brought on record. The controversy arose when the benefit of higher pay scales already granted in favour of the petitioners were sought to be withdrawn on the aforestated ground of non passing of departmental examination before attaining the age of 50 years. Being aggrieved, the petitioners along with some other similarly situate officers approached the then Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal by way of an Original Application (OA) No. 2042 of 1997, which on abolition of the said Tribunal came to be transferred to this Court and registered as CWP (T) No. 4664 of 2008, which was disposed of vide judgment dated 24.6.2010 on the ground that while withdrawing the benefits already granted to the petitioners therein, many out of whom are also before this Court in the present writ petition, were neither put to notice nor heard in the matter and thus resulting in violation of the principles of natural justice, with a direction that before the impugned order of withdrawal of benefit dated 22.10.1997 was implemented, opportunity shall be afforded to the affected officers and only thereafter the respondent authorities shall take action to recover the amount in accordance with law. Liberty was granted to the petitioners to approach the Court, if need so arose.