MUSHTAQ AHMED Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is contended that petitioner came to be engaged as 'Daily wager' on 1st of November' 1971, was appointed as attendant in the pay scale of Rs. 180-250. At the time of superannuation his pay scale was Rs. 5000-8000 (pre-revised) with effect from 01st of January" 2006 and revised pay band of Rs. 9300-34800. Thereafter, communication dated 1 st of April' 2010 issued by respondent no.6 indicate that one

(2.) Learned counsel for petitioner stated at bar that this Court has already passed a judgment in identical matter in SWP No. 1362/2006 and SWP No. 1128/2010 and prays that this petition be allowed and respondents be directed not to effect recovery of excess amount of pay and be restrained from reducing the rate of pension of petitioner.

(3.) Mr. Thakur and Ms. Mahajan, learned counsel for respondents argued that the writ petition is not maintainable for the reasons that this Court cannot direct the respondents to pass orders in breach of the rules. In support of the argument they cited a case State of West Bengal v. Subhas Kumar Chatterjee, 2010 AIR(SC) 2927