IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.19205 of 2010 Date of decision : 6.1.2011 Kulwant Rai Vs. State of Punjab and others CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI Present: Ms.Jyoti Sareen, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms.Anu Pal, AAG, Punjab. * * * Permod Kohli, J. The petitioner has retired as Junior Assistant on 30.6.2009 on attaining the age of superannuation. His retiral benefits have been paid. To the contrary, an amount of Rs.90,488/- is sought to be recovered from the retiral benefits of the petitioner by refixing his pay, and by withdrawing the benefits granted to the petitioner to step-up his pay at par with one Rajinder Singh, Junior Assistant as is evident from the order dated 28.5.2010 (Annexure P-6). Consequently, after re-fixation of pay of the petitioner, an amount of Rs.90,488/- was calculated for recovery and the same has been ordered to be deducted from his pensionary benefits vide order dated 7.7.2010. Learned State counsel submits that pension and commutation pension has already been sanctioned by the Accountant General (A&E), Punjab and other retiral benefits are in the process of being sanctioned. In view of the above submission made by learned State counsel, this petition is disposed of in the following manners:- (i) The sanctioned amount shall be released in favour of the petitioner within a period of one month. (ii) All other retiral benefits shall be settled and released within a period of three months. Needless to say that the petitioner is entitled to the statutory interest where ever payable. Apart from that, the petitioner will also be entitled to the interest at the rate of 6% on the delayed payment. As regards CWP No.19205 of 2010 the recovery/re-fixation is concerned, from the order Annexures P-6 and P-7, it appears that benefits were conferred upon the petitioner on interpretation of the Govt. instructions/order. There is no allegation of any fraud or misrepresentation attributable to the petitioner. In so far as the question of recovery is concerned, the controversy involved is squarely covered by the Full bench Judgment of this Court in case tiled as Budh Ram and others Vs. State of Haryana and others (CWP No.2799 of 2008) decided on 22.05.2009, wherein following observation has been made:- “We have, therefore, no hesitation in holding that in case the employees who are recipient of the benefits extended to them on an erroneous interpretation or application of any rule, regulation, circular and instructions have not been any way contributed to such erroneous interpretation or have they committed any fraud, misrepresentation, deception to obtain the grant of such benefits, the benefits so extended may be stopped for the future, but the amount already paid to the employees cannot be recovered from them.” With regard to the question of re-fixation, a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide its order dated 2.3.2010 passed in CWP No.16323 of 2008 has already constituted a Committee for re-consideration of such cases of refixation. The case of the petitioner is also referred to the aforesaid Committee to consider the question of re-fixation of petitioner’s pension. The petitioner shall be entitled to revision of retiral benefits. In the event, the report of the Committee goes in favour of the petitioner, the petitioner shall be entitled to the revised pensionary and other benefits. The Committee shall decide the controversy within the time specified in the aforesaid judgment. The petitioner shall be at liberty to file a representation before the Committee if so desired. Petition stands disposed of accordingly. ( Permod Kohli ) Judge 06.01.2011 sd 2