IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.19429 of 2008 Date of Decision : March 18, 2010. Raksha Devi .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.A.K.Walia, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms.Charu Tuli, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. -.- 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? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioner is widow of late Kewal Krishan Singla who was a Pharmacist in the office of the Civil Surgeon, Patiala. The husband of the petitioner unfortunately passed away while in service on 18.10.2007. It appears that when the case for grant of family pension petitioner was moved, the official respondents realized that the benefit of ACP Scheme was erroneously granted to the deceased-husband of the petitioner. Resultantly, respondent No.2 passed the impugned order dated 10.1.2008 (Annexure P-1) withdrawing the benefit of ACP granted to the deceased-employee after completion of 16 years of service. As a result thereto, a recovery to the tune of Rs.76,826/- has been effected from the gratuity of the deceased-employee. C.W.P.No .19429 of 2008 2 Aggrieved, the petitioner has approached this Court. These facts are not in dispute. In my considered view, no adverse order having civil consequences could be passed against the petitioner after the death of her husband. The impugned order, thus, cannot sustain on this count alone. That apart, no recovery in any case could be effected from the petitioner or her deceased-husband as it is not the case of the respondents that the deceased-employee had mis-represented the facts or played fraud in order to secure monetary benefits. The challenge to the recovery order deserves to be sustained in the light of the principles laid down by a Full Bench of this Court in Budh Ram and others versus State of Haryana and others, 2009 (3) S.C.T.333. The writ petition is accordingly allowed; the impugned order dated 10.1.2008 (Annexure P-1) and consequential recovery order dated 4.7.2008 (Annexure P-3) are hereby quashed. The respondents are directed to release the recovered amount to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receiving a certified copy of this order. The petitioner shall also be entitled to the revised pension, gratuity and other retiral benefits and its arrears which shall also be paid to her within a period of two months thereafter. Dasti. March 18, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE