CWP No.21296 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. DATE OF DECISION: 24.12.2010 Sat Pal Upadhyay ...Petitioner VERSUS State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI PRESENT: Mr.KL Dhingra, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.Narinder Singh, Advocate for Mr.Narender Hooda, Advocate for respondents Permod Kohli, J. (Oral) Keeping in view the controversy involved and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is disposed of at motion stage. The petitioner retired from the post of A.E. On 30.6.2009 on attaining the age of superannuation. The respondents have recovered an amount of Rs.1,80,472/- from the retiral benefits of the petitioner on account of shortage/breakage of transformer etc. The petitioner has accordingly filed this petition seeking a direction for payment of the aforesaid amount recovered from the petitioner. It is agreed to by the learned counsel for the parties that the CWP No.21296 of 2010 2 controversy involved in this petition is squarely covered by various judgments of this Court. In the case of S.S.Arya vs. Uttar Haryana Bijli Nigam, Panchkula and others, 2009(3) SCT 440, this Court issued following directions:- “10.Consequently, the petition is allowed with costs and the charge-sheet dated 31.1.2007 (Annexure P-1) and all the subsequent proceedings arising therefrom are set aside, and the respondents are directed to release the amount of Rs.1,38,018.40 with interest @ 9% to the petitioner within a period of two months from today. Costs are assessed at Rs.10,000/-.” Similar issued has again been considered by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No.2768 of 2009 (Dhan Singh vs. Uttar Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Limited and others decided on 11.3.2010) wherein following observations have been made:- “2. The respondents are not entitled to make any such deduction unilaterally without actually determining the loss alleged to have been caused by the petitioner. Such a determination cannot be done without holding a proper enquiry and giving to the petitioner appropriate opportunity to join the enquiry to show cause that the deduction cannot be done. The impugned deduction made by the respondents is quashed and the respondents are directed to release the amount which is deducted namely Rs.1,36,156/- within a period of 4 weeks with interest at 9% per annum from the date when the amount became payable. Any constitution of an enquiry and its continuance could be only in terms of Rule 2.2(b) of Punjab Civil Service Rules. 3. The writ petition is allowed on the above terms.” CWP No.21296 of 2010 3 In view of the above, this petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to release the withheld amount of the retiral benefits within a period of two months with interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date a certified copy of this order is received by the competent authority. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 24.12.2010 MFK CWP No.10585 of 2010 4