BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD Vs. MADAN MOHAN PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the Patna High Court has been preferred against the order dated 18 -2 -2000, passed by a learned Single Judge in CWJC No. 3693 of 1998 (Madan Mohan Prasad v. Bihar State Electricity Board and Ors.), whereby the order bearing memo No. 352, dated 12 -3 -1998 (Annexure -2 to the writ petition), has been set aside. By this order, the appellant -Board sought to recover a sum of Rs. 40, 183.60p. from respondent No. 1 (the writ petitioner) on account of excess pay drawn by him due to wrong fixation of pay while he was in service.

(2.) Respondent No. 1 had initially joined the appellant's service as a Bill Clerk, was promoted to the higher post of Assistant Accountant, and finally retired as Accountant with effect from 31 -7 -1997 after reaching the age of sixty years. Respondent No. 1 had submitted representation dated 31 -1 -1984 (Annexure -2) to the appellant stating therein that one Jagdish Prasad, Upper Division Assistant Accountant, was junior to him but drawing higher salary. It was, therefore, requested to grant pay protection to respondent No. 1. The Board examined the matter and afforded pay protection to respondent No. 1, vide order bearing memo No. 126, dated 14 -5 -1984 (Annexure -4 to the writ petition). The order incorporated the following condition while affording pay protection to respondent No. 1:

(3.) By letter bearing memo No. 3756, dated 4 -11 -1995 (Annexure -6 herein), the Board had withdrawn the pay protection afforded to the aforesaid Jagdish Prasad, and by the consequential office order No. 13, dated 3 -2 -1996 (Annexure -7 herein), the excess pay drawn by him was recovered from him. It is stated in the second supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the Board that Jagdish Prasad superannuated from the services of the Board in August 1995, and the amount has already been recovered from him.