CWP No. 5988 of 2007 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 5988 of 2007 Date of Decision: 11.4.2008 Chander Parkash ....Petitioner Versus Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. and others .....Respondents Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL Present: Shri J.L. Senta, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri Narender Hooda, Advocate, for the respondents. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers 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? HEMANT GUPTA, J. The challenge in the present writ petition is to the order dated 20.3.2006 (Annexure P.2), whereby a sum of Rs.2,25,887/- (less a sum of Rs.9,395/- which was waived off) has been ordered to be recovered from the retiral benefits of the petitioner on account of shortage of material and transformer missing parts & oil. Recovery is also sought to be made from the petitioner to give effect to the order of punishment dated 18.2.1988 stopping two annual increments without future effect. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it transpires that CWP No. 5988 of 2007 (2) on 18.2.1998, a punishment of stoppage of two annual increments without future effect was imposed upon the petitioner, but before the said punishment could be given effect to, the petitioner was compulsorily retired with effect from 26.11.1999. It is the case of the respondents that since the effect to the order dated 18.2.1998 could not be given effect to during the service tenure of the petitioner, therefore, the increments, which were to be stopped on account of punishment imposed, have been ordered to be recovered from the petitioner. We are of the opinion that the action of the respondents in recovering the said amount of annual increments is wholly illegal. The punishment was of stoppage of two annual increments. If the said order could not be given effect to on account of compulsory retirement of the petitioner, the respondents cannot recover the cash equivalent to the increments on account of retirement of the petitioner. The punishment of stoppage of annual increments has in fact become redundant. Consequently, the said stand of the respondents is wholly unjustified. In respect of recovery of Rs.2,16,492/- on account of shortages, the learned counsel for the respondents could not refer to any show cause notice so as to impose a punishment of the recovery of the loss suffered. Since no proceedings have been taken to recover the aforesaid amount, we are of the opinion that the withholding of the retiral benefits to the said extent are wholly unjustified. Consequently, we allow the present writ petition and direct the respondents to release the withheld amount to the petitioner within a period of three months. However, it shall be open to the respondents to take CWP No. 5988 of 2007 (3) appropriate action in accordance with law to recover the shortages, if any, and the said process shall be completed by the respondents within a period of two months. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE (MOHINDER PAL) JUDGE 11.4.2008 ds