IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 10075 of 2010 Date of decision : 28.07.2011 Dr. Dalbir Singh ......Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present: Mr. Kanwaljit, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Harmanjit Singh Jugait, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Ram Lal Gupta, Addl. A.G. Punjab **** RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) The petitioner is seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for setting aside the orders of re-fixation of pay dated 25.02.2010 (Annexures P-8 and P-9) in view of the Full Bench Judgment in the case of Budh Ram vs. State of Haryana. The petitioner was appointed as Director in the State of Punjab as PCMS-II on ad hoc basis w.e.f 24.03.1975. He was taken on the regular cadre strength in the Punjab Health Department w.e.f 30.09.1977. Thereafter, he was promoted as Senior Lecturer (ENT) by the Government of Punjab vide its order dated 10.10.1987 (Annexure P-2) and was granted further promotion as Associate Professor in Medical College, Patiala vide order dated 29.12.2006 (Annexure P-3). Vide order dated 07.04.1999 (Annexure P-4), the Government of Punjab revised the scales of teachers of the Punjab State Medical/Dental CWP No. 10075 of 2010 -2- Colleges. The said revision in the pay scale was to be made w.e.f 01.01.1996. The petitioner enjoyed the pay scale of Rs. 3700-5300 with a basic of Rs. 5600/-. Thereafter, in view of the Government Notification, his pay scale was revised to Rs.15,900/- w.e.f 01.01.1996 vide Annexure P-5 dated 24.05.2000. The said revision was later on carried out in the year 2002 again w.e.f 01.01.1996 to Rs. 17250/- as per Annexure P-6 dated 12.02.2002. Government of Punjab has issued a fresh notification on 29.07.2009 called as Punjab Civil Services (Revised Pay) First Amendment Rules, 2009 which is denied to have come into operation w.e.f 01.01.2006 (Annexure P-7). Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has never misrepresented to get his pay scale revised. The notification has rather been issued so as to grant increments and revised pay structures w.e.f 01.01.2006. However, by complete misreading and misapplication of Annexure P-4, the respondents had issued orders dated 25.02.2010 (Annexure P-8 and P-9) whereby the petitioner's pay scale has been brought down w.e.f 01.01.1996 without issuing any notice to the petitioner, without seeking his reply and without granting any opportunity of hearing. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner was drawing a basic pay of Rs. 17250/- w.e.f 01.01.1996 and the same has been brought down to Rs.15,100/- from the said date . After passing the orders, recovery was sought to be made from the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to a Full Bench decision of this Court in Budh Ram vs. State of Haryana and others 2009(3) PLR 511 wherein it has been held that neither any recoveries can be affected from an employee who received the benefit without any fault or CWP No. 10075 of 2010 -3- misrepresentation on his part nor the basis pay of an employee can be refixed or brought down without any notice, reply, opportunity of hearing and passing of a speaking order. In view of the law laid down in Budh Ram's case (supra), Annexures P-8 and P-9 are hereby quashed. Recovery, ifany, effected from the petitioner shall be refunded preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order is received. As regards the issue of withdrawing of benefit of increments/emoluments on account of wrong fixation of pay w.e.f 01.01.1996, the learned counsel for the parties are agreed that the issued can be referred to the Departmental Committee already ordered to be constituted vide order dated 31.03.2010 passed by this Court in CWP No. 8699 of 2008 (Dr. Varinder Singh v. State of Punjab and others) which is already seized of the similar matters. Accordingly, it is directed that the aforementioned issue shall be placed before the Departmental Committee so constituted or to be constituted, who shall consider the claim of the petitioner and dispose of the same by passing a speaking order as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order is received. Suffice it to say that in case the Committee accepts the petitioner's claim, the benefit earlier granted to him shall be restored and consequential arrears and/or revised retiral benefits shall be paid. However, till the Committee takes an appropriate decision, the retiral benefits shall be released, if already CWP No. 10075 of 2010 -4- not released, as per the fixed pay but without prejudice to the petitioner's claim to be decided by the Committee. Disposed of. July 28, 2011 (RITU BAHRI) G.Arora JUDGE