COCP No.2000 of 2008 -: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH COCP No.2000 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision: September 09, 2009. Avtar Singh ...Petitioner(s) v. Shri R.K. Goyal ...Respondent(s) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG Present: Shri S.K. Sud, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri M.C. Berry, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondent. ORDER Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. (Oral): As per the averments made in this petition, the Punjab Govt. granted higher pay scale to the Engineers vide notification dated 19.5.1998 with effect from 1.1.1996. The petitioner was promoted as SDO on 14.1.1990 and was granted necessary pay scale. It is the further case of the petitioner that vide order dated 7.4.2004, the special pay of the petitioner was withdrawn and he was directed to deposit the arrears which were paid to him. The petitioner filed CWP No.9268 of 2004 in which recovery of the arrears was stayed. The defence taken by the respondent was that the petitioner was entitled to the pay scale with effect from 1.1.1997 instead of 1.1.1996. On the application of the petitioner, vide order dated 15.11.2007, COCP No.2000 of 2008 -: 2 :- this Court directed that whatever benefits the petitioner is entitled to after giving him special pay scale with effect from 1.1.1997, the same shall be calculated and disbursed to him within three months from receipt of copy of the order. According to the petitioner, the aforesaid benefits were not released to him, hence this petition. In response to the show cause notice issued by this Court, affidavit of Shri R.K. Goel, Chief Engineer/Canals, Irrigation Works, Punjab, Chandigarh was filed in which it was submitted that the claim of the petitioner was considered and intimated to him by the Director, Hydel Designs Organization, Punjab vide letter dated 19.1.2009, attached as Annexure R-1 with the reply, and was asked to submit the indemnity bond for making him the payment of his benefits. It was further submitted that the arrears of pay were not granted to the petitioner as a sum of Rs.91,151/- towards recovery was payable by him. The respondents filed additional affidavit of Shri Vinod Choudhary, Chief Engineer/Canals, Irrigation Works Punjab, according to which the details of the payments made to the petitioner and recoveries made from him has been shown. However, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that the calculations shown by the respondents are not correct and he is entitled to more amount. Be that as it may, it is not in dispute that the respondents have passed an order dated 19.1.2009 considering the claim of the petitioner and that some payments have been made/adjusted, I am not inclined to proceed further in this contempt petition. Rule discharged. COCP No.2000 of 2008 -: 3 :- However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to seek any other appropriate remedy for redressal of his remaining grievances, if any. September 09, 2009. [ Rakesh Kumar Garg ] kadyan Judge