IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11694 of 2009 Chhatrapati Shivajee, S/o Late Narendra Singh, resident of Mohalla Chandmari Motihari, Rajendra Hostal Road, P.O. Motihari, Dist. East Champaran, retired from Muzib Girls High School, Motihari. ------- Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar, through the Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Secondary Education, Bihar, New Secretariat, Bailey Road, Patna. 2. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna. 3. The District Magistrate, East Champaran, Headquarter, Motihari. 4. The District Education Officer, East Champaran, Motihari. 5. The Headmaster, Muzib Girls High School, Motihari. --------- Respondents ----------- 7 21.11.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner, after his retirement, has two fold grievances. The petitioner claims that on the basis of his appointment in a High School, when his salary was fixed under the orders and approval of the competent authority, the same ought not have been reduced only at the time of his retirement when the pension papers were sent to the office of Accountant General. He has further submitted that after the retirement of the petitioner, he cannot be subjected to a huge recovery as has been proposed under the orders of the Accountant General. In this case, a counter affidavit and a supplementary counter affidavit have already been filed, wherein, the respondents 2 have clarified that there was certain anomaly in the pay fixation of the petitioner and that the anomaly was ultimately sought to be rectified in the light of the opinion of the Accountant General. It has also been submitted that the petitioner’s pension papers have ultimately been finalled by the Accountant General and that the payment of his real entitlement will be made. In the considered opinion of this Court, while there can be no dispute in law that a person drawing higher salary beyond his entitlement may ask for reprieve from being coerced to pay back by way of recovery of amount what was paid in excess to him but then the pay fixation for the purpose of pension will only be the same which, he is entitled in law. In the present case, therefore, whatever pay fixation has been made by the Accountant General will be made basis for payment of all the retirement benefit to the petitioner but, the respondents will not make any recovery of any excess amount unless they are in a position to establish that such excess payment was made on account of any fraud or misrepresentation on the part of the 3 petitioner. In order to complete this exercise, all payment of final pension or other retirement benefit to the petitioner as per his entitlement fixed by the Accountant General and also to decide the question of recovery, this Court would give liberty to the petitioner to approach the Director, Secondary Education by filing his representation and the Director, Secondary Education shall pass his order so that the payment of retirement benefit to the petitioner is made within a period of three months from the date of filing of representation along with a copy of this order. With the aforementioned observations and direction, this application is disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)