CWP No.12174 of 1989 [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
C. W. P. No. 12174 of 1989
Date of Decision: 2 - 12 - 2008
S.L.Gupta ....Petitioner
v.
Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra ....Respondents
and others
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
***
Present: Mr.Dheeraj Jain, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr.Jayender S. Chandail, Addl.A.G., Haryana.
Mr.R.K.Malik, Sr.Advocate with
Mr.Vishal Malik, Advocate
for the private respondents.
***
KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA (ORAL)
Mr.Malik state that he is appearing on behalf of private
respondents. He state that by efflux of time the petitioner and all private
respondents have retired and the present petition has been rendered
infructuous.
It is submitted that since the petitioner and private respondents
have already retired, in case any benefit has accrued to them, then no
recovery be effected in view of the settled legal proposition.
It was held in Sahib Ram v. The State of Haryana and
CWP No.12174 of 1989 [2]
others, 1995 Supreme Court Cases Suppl. (1) 18, that when there is no
misrepresentation on the part of the employee, the recovery cannot be
effected. It was also held in Purshottam Lal Das and others v. The State
of Bihar and others in Appeal (Civil) 4386 of 2006 decided on 10th
October, 2006 that recovery may not be just, where there is no
misrepresentation on the part of the employee. In Babulal Jain v. State of
M.P. and others, 2007 (4) SLR 123, Hon’ble Apex Court has further held
that where the candidate has not committed any fraud or misrepresentation,
recovery ought not to be effected.
Dismissed as infructuous, as prayed and recovery be not
effected in view of the observations made above.
( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA )
December 2, 2008. JUDGE
RC