CWP No.16892 of 2009 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Date of decision: 11.03.2010 ... Petitioner Arjun Dev Versus State of Haryana and another ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI Present: Mr. Surinder Sheoran, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. RKS Brar, Addl.AG, Haryana, for the respondents. PERMOD KOHLI, J. (Oral): The petitioner retired from service as Patwari from the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Hisar on 30.09.2008 on attaining the age of superannuation. He has submitted his pension papers but the pensionary benefits have not been paid to him. The petitioner filed CWP No.4769 of 2009 which came to be disposed of vide order dated 31.07.2009 with a direction to the respondents to release the pension and pensionary benefits due to the petitioner. While releasing the pension, the respondents deducted a sum of Rs.1,90,822/- from the DCRG and leave encashment vide order dated 22.10.2009. It is this order which has been challenged in the present writ petition. From the perusal of the impugned order, it appears that recovery has been effected due to wrong fixation of pay of the petitioner. In the reply filed by the respondents it is also stated that the pay of the petitioner has been wrongly fixed and, thus, pay has been refixed and recovery made. CWP No.16892 of 2009 2 As far the refixation of the pay is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no grievance to that effect. He has, however, submitted that recovery is sought to be made from the petitioner on account of the wrong fixation of his pay. It is neither the case of the respondents in the reply that the amount sought to be deducted was granted to the petitioner on account of misrepresentation or fraud on the part of the petitioner nor the impugned order indicates the same. The issue is squarely covered by a Full Bench judgment of this Court rendered in the case of Budh Ram and others Vs. State of Haryana and others, (CWP No.2799 of 2008 and other connected matters) on 22.05.2009, wherein the following directions have been issued:- “We have, therefore, no hesitation in holding that in case the employees who are recipient of the benefits extended to them on an erroneous interpretation or application of any rule, regulation, circular and instructions have not been any way contributed to such erroneous interpretation or have they committed any fraud, misrepresentation, deception to obtain the grant of such benefit, the benefit so extended may be stopped for the future, but the amount already paid to the employees cannot be recovered from them.” In view of the above, the present writ petition is hereby allowed. The impugned order/letter dated 22.10.2009 (Annexure P-1) in so far as recovery is concerned, is hereby quashed and set aside. However, the order impugned refixing the pay of the petitioner is held to be valid. If any CWP No.16892 of 2009 3 recovery pursuant to the impugned order is made from the petitioner, the same shall be refunded to him at the earliest. 11.03.2010 (PERMOD KOHLI) BLS JUDGE Note: Whether to be referred to the Reporter? NO