Civil Writ Petition No. 16704 of 2005 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.M. No.9085 of 2011 and Civil Writ Petition No. 16704 of 2005 Date of decision:- 01.08.2011 Prabhjot Kaur (Retired Teacher) ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present:- Mr. Ashok Kumar Nabhewala, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Kavita Arora, AAG Punjab. RITU BAHRI J.(Oral) C.M. No.9085 of 2011 Application is allowed. C.W.P. No.16704 of 2005 This writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India directing the respondents to refund the recovery of Rs.44,265/- alongwith interest, which was made from the DCRG of the petitioner. Petitioner was working as teacher and has retired on 13.4.2004. At the time of scrutiny of the pension case of the petitioner the Accountant General, Punjab pointed out that over payment has been made to the petitioner on account of grant of proficiency stepped up by counting adhoc service. The period of adhoc service of the petitioner was from 21.7.1976 to 03.09.1980. A recovery of Rs.44,265/- has been effected from the Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity. No notice was given to the petitioner before this recovery was made. Civil Writ Petition No. 16704 of 2005 -2- The State of Punjab has issued instructions dated 21.6.2001 (Annexure P-4) that where the period of adhoc service rendered by an employee is included for calculating proficiency stepped up then the State Government shall not recover the amount already drawn by that employee. For the purpose of fixing the cadre seniority the benefit of adhoc service shall not be counted. The Supreme Court in Sahib Ram versus State of Haryana 1995(2) RSJ 139 has laid down the principle that if any payment has been made to an employee without any misrepresentation of fraud retrospective recovery cannot be made. The petitioner had retired on 13.4.2004 and she was granted the benefit of adhoc service rendered from 21.7.1976 to 03.09.1980 for proficiency stepped up. She had made no misrepresentation or committed fraud for getting this benefit. As per the Government instructions (Annexure P-4) a decision has been taken not to do any recovery if such period has been counted for granting proficiency stepped up. The Full Bench of this Court in Budh Ram and others versus State of Haryana and others (CWP No.2799 of 2008 decided on 22.5.2009) reported as 2009(3) PLR 511 has held that in case of re-fixation of salary, which was not on the basis of misrepresentation and fraud, no recovery should be made by the State Government. This writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to refund the recovered amount deducted from the Death-cum-Retirement Gratuity of the petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. August 01, 2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) Vijay Asija JUDGE