CWP No.16581 of 2009.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.16581 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 29.01.2010 **** Jatinder Singh and others . . . . Petitioners VS. State of Punjab and others . . . . . 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. Pritam Saini, Advocate for the petitioners Mr. B.S. Chahal, DAG Punjab ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioners who are working as Canal Patwaris and Junior Assistants with the respondent- Irrigation Department, seek quashing of orders dated 25.10.2005 (Annexure P6); 27.02.2008 (Annexure P7); 13.02.2009 (Annexure P8); 15.06.2009 (Annexure P9) and 23.09.2009 (Annexure P11), whereby, the benefits of selection- grade/senior-scale/proficiency Step-up have been withdrawn and consequential recovery notices have been issued. CWP No.16581 of 2009.doc - 2 – (2). The main grievance of the petitioners is that no recovery can be effected as they never mis- represented the facts nor mislead the authorities while seeking one or the other service claims. (3). Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto, the respondents have filed their counter- reply. In para 11 thereof, it is acknowledged that the benefits were granted to the petitioners, inadvertently and not for any mis-representation on their part. That being so, the recovery notice cannot sustain as ruled by a Full Bench of this Court in Budh Ram vs. State of Haryana, 2009 (3) PLR 511. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed; the recovery notices issued against the petitioners are hereby quashed. The recovery, if any, already made shall be refunded to the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. (4). Ordered accordingly. (5). Dasti . (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 29.01.2010 vishal shonkar