CWP No.11978 of 2009 --1-- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 11978 of 2009 Date of decision : 3.2.2010 Santokh Singh Chawla ... Petitioner Versus Punjab State Electricity Board and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL **** Present: Mr. H K Brinda, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Hitesh Sood, Advocate for the respondents. **** AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (ORAL) The petitioner has approached this Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the order Annexure P-5 dated 07.04.2008 and Annexure P-6 dated 24.07.2009 whereby the benefit of promotional increments which were granted to the petitioner has been ordered to be withdrawn with retrospective effect and as a consequence thereof, recovery has been ordered from the pension of the petitioner. The facts necessary for the disposal of the writ petition may be noticed. Upon his selection by the respondent-Board, the petitioner joined as Junior Engineer (Civil) on 8.1.1971. He CWP No.11978 of 2009 --2-- was promoted as AE (Civil) from AMIE quota on 9.1.1992 and after having served for 23 years, the benefit of 23 years promotional increment in the Pay Scale of Rs. 7750-14500 was granted to the petitioner vide order dated 28.10.2002 w.e.f. 1.1.1996. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted as AEE (Civil) on 23.1.2003 from where he retired on 31.01.2007 after having served for about 36 years. It is thereafter, that the respondent-Board served a notice (Annexure P-3) upon the petitioner for withdrawal of the advance promotional increment which was granted to him on completion of 23 years of service. The petitioner submitted his reply to the said notice on 5.3.2008 (Annexure P-4) which did not find favour with the respondent-Board who rejected the same vide order dated 7.4.2008 (Annexure P-5) and vide letter dated 24.7.2009 (Annexure P-6), an intimation was sent to the petitioner for recovery of the amount which was paid in consequence of the benefit of 23 years promotional increment which was granted to the petitioner in October, 2002 w.e.f. 1.1.1996. These are Annexures P-5 and P-6 issued by the respondent-Board which have been impugned by the petitioner in the writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner drew support from the Full Bench decision of this Court in CWP No.2799 of 2008 (Budh Ram and others v. State of Haryana and others) decided on 22.5.2009 and contended that the respondents are not justified to recover any payment from the petitioner which was made to him in excess of his entitlement on account of any mistake, particularly where no fraud or misrepresentation is CWP No.11978 of 2009 --3-- alleged against him. Upon notice, reply has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4 controverting the stand taken by the petitioner in the writ petition. However, during the course of arguments, learned counsel for the respondents could not controvert that in view of the Full Bench decision in the case of Budh Ram's case (Supra), the Annexures P-5 and P-6 are legally unsustainable. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed and Annexures P-5 and P-6 are hereby quashed. It is directed that, in case, any amount has already been recovered from the petitioner on the aforesaid count, the same shall be refunded to him forthwith. February 03, 2010 (AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) atulsethi JUDGE