HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.5488 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: 10.08.2011 **** Prem Chand Sharma . . . . 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. Harinder Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. BS Chahal, DAG Punjab **** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner, who retired as Hindi Teacher in the Education Department, Government of Punjab is aggrieved by the action of the respondents in deducting Rs.131059/- from his Gratuity on account of re-fixation of his pay. (2). Notice of motion was issued and pursuant thereto, the respondents have filed their counter-reply/affidavit. It is nowhere averred by the respondents that 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, CWP No.5488 of 2011.doc - 2 – 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 is allowed and the impugned order(s) to the extent ordering recovery from the petitioner is/are hereby quashed. The respondents are directed to refund the amounts if any already recovered from the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (5). Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 10.08.2011 vishal shonkar (S u r y a K a n t) Judge