IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH
Civil Writ Petition No.13985 of 2009
Date of Decision: September 10, 2009
Manjit Singh
.....PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
State of Punjab & Others
.....RESPONDENT(S)
. . .
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA
PRESENT: - Mr. R.K. Arora, Advocate, for the
petitioner.
Mr. B.S. Chahal, Deputy Advocate
General, Punjab, for the
respondents.
. . .
AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral)
Challenge in this petition is to Order
dated 17.8.2009 (Annexure P-2) wherein benefit of
proficiency step up given to the petitioner during
the course of service has been withdrawn and ordered
to be given with effect from a subsequent date.
Accordingly, pay has been directed to be refixed and
ordered recovery of over-payment.
Learned counsel for the petitioner
confines the claim of the petitioner in challenge
to recovery only. It has been contended that the
petitioner neither played any fraud nor
misrepresented the facts so as to actuate wrong
fixation of pay. In this view of the matter, the
CWP No.13985 of 2009 [2]
case of the petitioner is covered by judgment dated
22.5.2009 rendered by the Hon’ble Full Bench of
this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.2799 of 2008 (Budh Ram &
Others vs. State of Haryana & Others).
Learned counsel for the respondents
has not been able to draw attention of the Court
towards any material or evidence to indicate that
the petitioner had played fraud or misrepresented
facts.
In view of the above, it become
evident that the matter is covered by judgment
dated 22.5.2009 rendered by the Hon’ble Full
Bench of this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.2799 of 2008
(Budh Ram & Others vs. State of Haryana & Others).
The petition is allowed to the
extent that the respondents would have no right
to effect recovery from the petitioner on account
of refixation of pay. Consequently, the
respondents are directed that if any recovery has
been effected from the petitioner, the amount
shall be refunded to the petitioner within a
period of four months from the date of receipt of
a certified copy of this order.
(AJAI LAMBA)
September 10, 2009 JUDGE
avin
1. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?