R.S.A. No. 1854 of 2009 1
IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT
CHANDIGARH
R.S.A. No. 1854 of 2009 (O&M)
Date of Decision : 4.5.2009
The State of Haryana & another
.......... Appellants
Versus
Dwarka Dass
...... Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA
Present : Ms. Navin Malik, Addl. A.G. , Haryana
for the appellants.
****
VINOD K. SHARMA, J. (ORAL)
This regular second appeal is directed against the judgment and
decree dated 2.2.2009, passed by the learned Courts below, vide which suit
filed by the plaintiff / respondent to challenge the order dated 28.12.2004,
passed by the General Manager, Haryana Roadways,Jind Depot, Jind, to be
illegal, null and void, arbitrary against the principles of natural justice and
service Rules, stands decreed.
The plaintiff / respondent was granted one additional increment
and first higher standard scale grade by the appellant / defendants. However,
subsequently, the order was withdrawn and recovery was ordered to be
made.
The learned Courts below have recorded a concurrent finding,
that the impugned order cannot be sustained, as no fraud or
R.S.A. No. 1854 of 2009 2
misrepresentation on the part of the plaintiff / respondent was alleged,
therefore, no ground to recover the amount paid under valid order. The
court, thus, held that once there was no fraud or misrepresentation on the
part of the plaintiff / respondent, there was no ground to recover the amount.
The learned Addl. A.G. , Haryana contends that the appeal
raises the following substantial questions of law for consideration :-
1. Whether the judgment and decree passed by the
learned Courts below is outcome of misreading of
evidence, thus, perverse ?
2. Whether the suit filed by the plaintiff/ respondent
was not maintainable /
In support of the substantial questions of law, the learned Addl.
A.G. , Haryana contends, that once the relief was given to an employee to
which he was not entitled to, it was always open to the employer to set aside
the order, and recover the amount after issuing show cause notice, which
was done.
It is the contention of the learned Addl. A.G. Haryana, that
once the principles of natural justice were followed, and the order was
passed, it was not open to the Civil Court to sit in appeal, as the jurisdiction
of the Civil Court to interfere with the orders is limited.
However, there is no force in this contention. The order passed
by the learned Courts below does not suffer from any misreading of
evidence, and is based on admitted facts i.e. to say that the plaintiff /
respondent was not held to have played any fraud or misrepresentation in
R.S.A. No. 1854 of 2009 3
passing of the order, which is said to be illegal, The learned Courts below
have rightly held, that no recovery could be made.
The substantial questions of law raised do not arise for
consideration in this appeal.
No merit.
Dismissed.
4.5.2009 ( VINOD K. SHARMA ) 'sp' JUDGE