High Court Punjab-Haryana High Court

C.W.P No. 15697 Of 2008 vs Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran on 18 February, 2009

Punjab-Haryana High Court
C.W.P No. 15697 Of 2008 vs Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran on 18 February, 2009
C.W.P No. 15697 of 2008                                   ::1::

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH




                                      Date of decision : February 18, 2009



1.    C.W.P No. 15697 of 2008

      Ran Singh vs Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and others

2.    C.W.P No. 20152 of 2008

      Mool Chand vs Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and others

3.    C.W.P No. 16886 of 2008

      Fateh Singh vs Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and others

4.    C.W.P No. 18401 of 2008

      Surinder Pal Singh vs Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and
                            others

5.    C.W.P No. 17982 of 2008

      Sat Paul Sharma vs Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and
                         others

6.    C.W.P No. 123 of 2009

      Ram Dia vs Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and others

                                ***

CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI

***

Present : Mr. Jagbir Malik, Advocate
for the petitioners in CWP Nos.15697, 20152, 16886, 17982 of
2008 and 123 of 2009.

Mr. Naveen Daryal, Advocate
for the petitioner in CWP No.18401 of 2008.

Mrs. Neena Madan, Advocate
for Mr. Raghujit Singh Madan, Advocate
for the respondents in CWP Nos.15697, 20152 of 2008.

Mr. B.S.Rana, Advocate
for the respondents in CWP Nos.16886 and 17982 of 2008.

Mr. Mohnish Sharma, Advocate
C.W.P No. 15697 of 2008 ::2::

for Mr. Narinder Hooda, Advocate
for the respondents in CWP Nos.18401 of 2008 and 123 of 2009.

***

1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the
judgment ?

2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ?

***

AJAY TEWARI, J (Oral)

This order shall dispose of CWP Nos.15697, 20152, 16886,

18401, 17982 of 2008 and 123 of 2009, as common questions of law and

fact are involved therein.

The sole dispute in these cases is with regard to the validity of

recovery orders, which have been passed and implemented without any

notice to the pensioners. This fact is not disputed.

A reference in this regard is made to two Division Bench

judgments of this Court in Ram Narain Dua vs Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran

Nigam Ltd and others, 2007(1) RSJ 402, and CWP No.16997 of 2006, Ram

Dass vs Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and another, decided on

25.2.2008, wherein it has been categorically held that recovery from retiral

dues can only be made after conducting regular inquiry.

In these circumstances, these writ petitions are allowed and the

impugned recovery orders are set aside. The petitioners would be entitled

for refund of amounts withheld/recovered. However, this disbursal shall be

made after the petitioners give security to the satisfaction of Chief Accounts

Officer (Pension), Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited about the

refund of the same in case the amounts are found to be recoverable after the

due procedure. The respondents will make due payments to the petitioners

within one month of the production of aforementioned security.

C.W.P No. 15697 of 2008 ::3::

The respondents shall, however, be at liberty to pass fresh

orders after following due procedure in law.

                                        ( AJAY TEWARI       )
February    18, 2009.                        JUDGE
`kk'