CWP No.8682 of 2003.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.8682 of 2003 (O&M) Date of Decision: 09.11.2010 **** Jagir Singh . . . . Petitioner VS. General Insurance Corp. of India & Ors. . . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 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? **** Present: Mr. Angad Singh, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. RK Sharma, Advocate for the respondents ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner is an Assistant-III in the respondent- Corporation and is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 14.02.2003 (Annexure P5) vide which recovery on account of wrong fixation of his pay is sought to be effected from him. (2). The respondents have filed their counter- reply/affidavit defending the impugned action. CWP No.8682 of 2003.doc - 2 – (3). It is, however, no-where alleged by the respondents in their reply that the petitioner misrepresented the facts; played any fraud or deceived the authority in order to secure any undeserving monetary benefits. (4). That being the state of affairs, no recovery can be allowed to be effected from the petitioner as ruled by a Full Bench of this Court in Budh Ram & Others vs. State of Haryana & Others, 2009(3) PLR 511 as well as by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Registrar, Cooperative Societies Haryana and others v. Israil Khan and others, (2010) 1 SCC 440. (5). The writ petition is accordingly allowed in part; the impugned order dated 14.02.2003 (Annexure P5) is hereby quashed. The withheld/recovered amount, if any, is directed to be refunded to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (6). Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 09.11.2010 vishal shonkar (SURYA KANT) JUDGE