HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.4886 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 20.07.2011 **** Smt. Grace Gill . . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab & Ors. . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. Amit Chawla, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. BS Chahal, DAG Punjab **** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner who retired as Nursing Sister from the Health and Family Welfare Department, Government of Punjab, seeks a quashing of the orders dated 06.01.2010 & 22.09.2010 (Annexure P2) vide which her pay has been refixed/reduced upon withdrawal of the benefit of proficiency step-up granted to her on completion of 18/24 years’ service and consequential recovery of Rs.94378/- has been effected from her Gratuity. A direction to refund the amount recovered and to re-fix the pay of the petitioner has also been sought. (2). Notice of motion was issued and pursuant thereto, the respondents have filed their counter-reply/affidavit today in Court. It is nowhere averred by the respondents that CWP No.4886 of 2011.doc - 2 – the petitioner misled the authorities or played any fraud or deceived them to secure the undeserving monetary benefit(s). (3). Applying the ratio decidendi of the Full Bench decision in Budh Ram & Others vs. State of Haryana & Others, 2009(3) PLR 511 as well as the decision by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Registrar, Cooperative Societies Haryana and others v. Israil Khan and others, (2010) 1 SCC 440, I am of the considered view that no recovery can be effected from the petitioner. (4). Consequently, the writ petition, to the extent of recovery, is allowed and the impugned recovery order dated 22.09.2010 (Annexure P2) is hereby quashed. The respondents are directed to refund the amount recovered from the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (5). As regards his claim for re-fixation of pay, the petitioner is said to have served a legal notice dated 25.10.2010 (Annexure P8) upon the respondents which has not been responded yet. (6). Having heard learned counsel for the parties on the issue of re-fixation, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the petitioner as contained in the legal notice dated CWP No.4886 of 2011.doc - 3 – 25.10.2010 (Annexure P8) and dispose of the same, in consultation with the Audit & Accounts Department, by passing a speaking order within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (7). Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 20.07.2011 vishal shonkar (S u r y a K a n t) Judge