E*~ BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT APPEAL N0. r3Cl3 /2010 fARISING OUT OF W.P. fSI N0. 3298/20091 APPELLANTS : 1. RESPONDENTS/STATE ^o-1 ^»^ STATE OF CHHATTISGARH, Through: The Secretary, Water Resources Department DKS Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 6 ^^ ^'''J' ./clss 9f .y / "'/.•?" j!>/ R.3P'' 2. ' The Engineer-in-Chief, Water Resources Department, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3. The Chief Engineer, Water Resources Department, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh VERSUS RESPONDENT PETITIONER Chhakkelal Sandilya, aged about 40 years,S/o. Shri Hari Ram Sandilya, Occupation Government Servant/ft/o. Quarter No.H-12, Irrigation Colony, Prembag,Baikunthpur, District Korea, Chhattisgarh WRIT APPEAL UNDER SECTION rn OF CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT fAPPEAL TO DIVISION BENCH1 ACT. 2006 HI6H COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION B6NCH: HON'BLE SHRI I.M.QUbDUSI & HON'BLE SHRI N.K. A6ARWAL. JJ. WRIT APPEAL N0.201/2Q10 APPELLANTS Res.pondents/State No.l to 3 Vs RESPON&ENT Petitioner State of C.6. & Others Maheshwar Ram WRIT^PPEAL N0.202/2010 APPELLANTS Respondents/State No.l to 3 Vs RESPONDENT Petitioner State of C.6. & Others Mur'lidhar Diwan WRIT APPEAL N0.203/2010 APPELLANTS Respondents/State No.l to 3 Vs RESPONDENT Petitioner State of C.6. & Others Chhakkelal Sandilya WRIT APPEAL N0.204/2010 APPELLANTS Stateof C.6. & Others Respondents/State No.l to 3 Vs RESPONDENT Budhman Singh Petitioner & WRIT APPEAL N0.205/2010 APPELLANTS Respondents/State No.l to 3 RESPONDENT Petitioner Vs State of C.G. & Others Indram Ram Present: Mr.'Y.S. Thakur, Dy. Advocate General with Mr. Ajit Singh, P.L. for the appellants. Mr. K.R.JSJair, Advocate for the respondent. ORAL JUbGMENT (Passed on 05th July, 2010) I.M. Quddusi. J; 1. With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally. ^- S3i4.uoii4.no 4.uspuodsaj si|4. 04. uoi+oajip D ij+im j.o pssodsip SDM 3UIOS 31)4. PUD IJHO? si^ sjo^aq. l?0/T2frZ'ON 'd'M Suuoaq uoi+i+sd 4.UM D pajja^sjd SDI| uiajsi) 4.uspuods3J ai|4. '3JOj.3J3l|4 pUD U3>|D4. U3Sq SDl| uoi+OD ou 4.nq '4.uatU4.uioddD IDJ4.1UI Sll| j.0 S+Dp 31)4. UIOJj. 4.U3U13J3UI |DnUUD j.O- 4.UDJ6 joj. pauj33U03 S3!4.!Joq4.nD 31)4. ajoj.sq suoi4.D4.uas3Jd3j |DJ3A3S SpDlU UISJSq J.USpUOdsSJ 3l|+ p3A31j66D 6uj|83J c •34.D31J.I+J33 4.S34. 6UjdA+ IpUjl-j ^O uoissiiuqns j.o 34.0p 344. uuojj. atuos 31)4. ps+uojB 4.u3Ui4.uioddD IDJ4.1UI S.IL) j.0 S+Dp 31(4. tUOJ^ +U3U13J3U! |DnUUD 31(4. 6ui+UDj6 j.0 PD3J.SUI p3UJ33U03 /<J.UOl|4.nD 4.U3pUOdSSJ 31(4. 'J3A3MOl| 'psujasuoa X4.jjoi|4.nD ai|4. ajoj.3q aj.ooi^.i+jas 3q+ ps^+iiuqns puo 4.534. BuidXi !puiH ai|4. p3ssod uisjai) 4.uspuods3J 3L|t '4.534. 6uid^4. !pui[-| j.o SuissDd JS+J.D <<|uo p3|4.j4.u3 aq p|noM 4.uapuodsaj si|4. IJSIIIM joj. luaiusjsui |DnuuD i|4.iM 6uo|D 3|D3S Xod JD|n314.JDd D Ul lll-3poj9 4.UD4.sissv SD pa+uioddo SDM 4.U3pUodS3J 3l|+ 4.01)4. SJD SSD3 31)4. ^.O S+3D^ j.aUg "S •pauopuoa Sl ^D|3p pUD p3MO||D Sl UO!4.D31|ddD 31)4. 'A|6uipJ033D pUD p3UID|dX3 ^IJJO+OD^SI+DS U33q SDl| /D|3p 31(4. 4.01)4. UOIUldo 3l|+ J.O 3JD 3M '|D3ddD 4.1JM 31(4. 6ui|!j. Uj ^D|3p j.O UOI+DUOpUOS JOJ. UO!4.D31|ddD 31)4. Ul pSUBlSSD SUOSDSJ 3i|+ pssnjad fiuiADH ••^ •|D3ddo 4.um 3i|4. Suujsj.ajd ui Ao|3p j.o uoi+ouopuoa jo^. uoi+DoijddD '^'ON "v"i uo pjDa|-| •g,i •P3JJ3J.3J SJD OTOZ/SOZ"°N |03ddy 4.u/v\ j.o S4.3DJ. 4.uaui6pnf sii|4. j.o 3sodjnd 3i|4. joj. 'j3A3MO|-| •suoi4.!+3d 4.um 31(4. 6u!MO||D (sJaq+o '? "9'3 J-o s+o+S •s^\ dnjn> DJpuDqsuiDy) 60/£99E'°N (s) 'd'M soi* iioiq/w j.o 3SD3 6UjpD3| SUOIJ.j4.sd 4.1JM j.0 q34.oq ui a6pn^ 3|6uis paujDS) 31)4. Xq psssod 6002'IT'EZ ps-l-op JspJO y 4.u3tu6pnf pauSnduii ai|4. ^o 4.no asojo s|D3ddo 4.1JM 35344. ||D SD 4.uaui6pnf uou4U<03 S!i|4. Aq J.o pssodsip 6uisq SJD s|D3ddo 4.um aAoqo 341 's concerned to consider and decide the representation of the respondent herein on its own merit, in accordance with law. In the meantime, the respondent'herein and other similarly situated employees we.re. allowed benefit of annual increment after one year of his initial date of appointment vide order dated 4.7.2008. However, the appellant No.3 herein vide order dated 8.6.2009 dismissed the representation submitted by the respondent in compliance of the order of the learned Single Judge dated 31.3.2008 and cancelled t.he orders granting benefit of increment to the respondents herein from the date of their initial appointment. The appellant No.3 has also directed for recovery of the amount of annual increment paid to the respondent herein prior to the period of passing of Hindi typing test. Aggrieved therewith the respondent herein preferred a writ petition before this Court and this Court vide impugned order <& judgment dated 23.11.2009 allowed the writ petition and quashed the impugned order dated 8.6.2009. Learned Single Judge, while allowing the writ petition, has also ordered that if the recovery has already been made,'the amount so recovered shall be paid to the respondent along with interest © 67o per annum. 6. Earlier there was a judicial pronouncement in the cases of Malaydeen Verma and others Vs. State of M.P. reported 'in 1991 MPST 379 and B.L. Goyal Vs. State of M.P. & others (O.A. No.1981/99) regarding grant of annual ~ increments to the employees from the date of their initial appointment. In the instant case, the respondent has also passed the Hindi typing test and therefore, withholding of annual increment or recovery of-annual increment has been held as bad in law by the learned Single Judge vide impugned order & judgment. 7. Accordingly, we are not inclined to interfere in the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge. 8. However, we feel that finding of the learned Single Judge to the effect that if the amount has already been recovered, the respondent herein is entitled to the said amount with interest @ 67o per annum is not proper. In the ^ service matters the payments regarding service benefits are made from time to time and therefore, we feel that on the recovered amount, which is to be paid, interest should not be levied. 9. In view of above settled position, the writ appeal is partly allowed and the impugned order so far as it relates to imposition of 6% interest on the amount of annual increment so recovered is concerned, the same is hereby set aside. However, rest of the order of learned Single Judge dated 23.11.2009 shall remain intact and shatl be obeyed. 10. The writ appeal is allowed to the above extent. No order as to costs. 11. A copy of this order be placed in the record of other connected writ appeals. 12^. Certifjed copy as per rules. _._^- Roshan/- Sd/- I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge ^^