IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.23233 of 2010 Date of Decision: 24.01.2011 Kanta Devi ........Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others .......Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI Present: Mr. Surinder Garg, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Puneet Gupta, Addl. A.G., Punjab. ****** PERMOD KOHLI, J. (ORAL) With the consent of the parties, this petition is being disposed of at the motion stage without insisting for the reply. The petitioner was initially appointed as Staff Nurse on 17.06.1975 and promoted as Nursing Sister on 17.04.2004. She retired from the service on 31.12.2010 on attaining the age of superannuation. While in service, petitioner was paid proficiency step-up increments on completion of 8/18 years of regular service. When the pension benefits of the petitioner was being processed, an objection was raised by the Accountant General office regarding the wrongful excess payment of proficiency step-up. On that basis, pay of the petitioner has been re- fixed and recovery of ` 97,040/- has been ordered from the retiral benefits of the petitioner, vide letter dated 16.12.2010 (Annexure P-4). Petitioner has challenged the re-fixation and recovery. In so far as the question of recovery is concerned,the controversy has been settled by CWP No.23233 of 2010 -2- a full bench judgment of this Court rendered in the case of Budh Ram and others Versus State of Haryana and others decided on 22.5.2009 wherein following observations have been made:- “It is in the light of the above pronouncement, no longer open to the authorities granting the benefits, no matter erroneously, to contend that even when the employee concerned was not at fault and was not in any way responsible for the mistake committed by the authorities, they are entitled to recover the benefit that has been received by the employee on the basis of any such erroneous grant. We say so primarily because if the employee is not responsible for the erroneous grant of benefit to him/her, it would induce in him the relief that the same was indeed due and payable. Acting on that belief the employee would, as any other person placed in his position arrange his affairs accordingly which he may not have done if he had known that the benefit being granted to him is likely to be withdrawn at any subsequent point of time on wheat may be then said to be the correct interpretation and application of rules. Having induced that belief in the employee and made him change his position and arrange his affairs in a manner that he would not otherwise have done, it would be unfair, inequitable and harsh for the Government to direct recovery of the excess amount simply because on a true and correct interpretation of the rules, such a benefit was not due....... 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 in any way contributed to such erroneous interpretation nor have they committed any fraud, misrepresentation, deception to obtain the grant of such benefit, the benefit so extended may be stopped for CWP No.23233 of 2010 -3- the future, but the amount already paid to the employees cannot be recovered from them....”. The recovery from the petitioner is thus impermissible in law. In so far the question of re-fixation is concerned, respondent-State has already constituted a Committee pursuant to the judgment dated 31.03.2010 in Civil Writ Petition No.18754 of 2007 titled as Amarjit Singh Versus State of Punjab and others. In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with the following directions:- 1. Recovery from the petitioner vide the impugned order dated 16.12.2010 (Annexure P-4) is hereby quashed; 2. The issue relating to re-fixation shall be referred to the Committee, constituted by the State in view of the judgment dated 31.03.2010 in Civil Writ Petition No.18754 of 2007. 3. Retiral benefits shall also be released within three months from today. Disposed of. 24.01.2011 (PERMOD KOHLI) Gagan JUDGE