CWP No.13406 of 1990 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.13406 of 1990 DATE OF DECISION: April 1, 2011 BHALLE RAM KAUSHIK & OTHERS ...PETITIONERS VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER ...RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN. 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? No 2. To be referred to the reporters or not? No 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the digest? No ---- PRESENT: MR. RANJIT SAINI, ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONERS. MR. S.S. GORIPURIA, DAG, HARYANA. K.KANNAN, J.(ORAL) 1. The writ petition challenges the proceedings of the Managing Director of the Haryana State Minor Irrigation & Tubewell Corporation reducing the scales of pay for Junior Scale Stenographers working in the Corporation from `1400-`2600 to `1200-`2040/-. The reduction was pursuant to a decision taken by the Haryana Government reducing the scales of pay for Junior Scale Stenographers at `1200-`2040/-. Earlier when the Corporation had taken a decision through a Resolution passed by the Board of Directors for fixation of scales of pay for Junior Scale Stenographers, they had decided to apply the same scales as were provided by the Finance Department, Haryana for their own employees serving as Junior Scale Stenographers. The parity which the Corporation decided to apply through the decision dated 4.6.1987, was sought to be retained subsequently through the impugned order of the Managing Director when the Government had CWP No.13406 of 1990 -2- chosen to reduce the scales to `1200-`2040/-. Infact, the Corporation was adopting the same scales as Haryana Government was applying for Junior Scale Stenographers. Unless the power of the Corporation to determine the scales itself is in dispute, the petitioner cannot challenge the decision. The order, however, insofar as it provides for recovery of amount already paid to the workers of higher scale, ought not to have been directed to be refunded or withdrawn. A Full Bench of this Court has held in CWP No.2799 of 2008 Budh Ram and others vs. State of Haryana and others, decided on 22.5.2009, that any payment made in excess to an employee which was not on account of any fraud or misrepresentation by the employee or when it was not the result of any ordinary clerical error, the same cannot be directed to be withdrawn. The impugned order insofar as it directs recovery of higher scales already availed by the employees would alone be quashed. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that the Corporation itself has been wound up in the year 2006 and the employees of the Corporation were subsequently absorbed in State service. The question of recovery by the respondent-Corporation itself cannot no longer be a real threat for the petitioners. However, their right is, in any way, protected through this order in quashing that portion of the order of the Managing Director directing recoveries of alleged excess amount paid to them when the scales of pay applied to them was `1400-`2600/-. 3. The writ petition is ordered to the above extent. April 1, 2011 (K.KANNAN) Gulati JUDGE