HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.9579 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 27.05.2011 **** Trishla Rani & Ors. . . . . Petitioners 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. RK Arora, Advocate for the petitioners **** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) (1). Notice of motion. On the asking, Mr. JS Puri, learned Addl. AG Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Having regard to the nature of order which I propose to pass there is no necessity to call upon the respondent(s) to file their reply(ies)/affidavit(s), at this stage. (2). The petitioners are Teacher/Instructor/Masters/ Junior Assistants who retired from the Education Department, Government of Punjab. They are aggrieved by the action of the respondents in effecting recovery of the alleged overpayments made from them on account of wrong fixation of their pay. A direction to refund to amount CWP No.9579 of 2011.doc - 2 – recovered from the petitioners along with interest is also sought. (3). Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners have never misled the authorities or played any fraud or deceived them to secure the undeserving monetary benefit(s). (4). 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 petitioners. (5). Consequently, the writ petition is allowed in part and the impugned action of the respondents to the extent effecting recovery from the petitioners is hereby quashed. The respondents are directed to refund the amount if any already recovered from the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (6). Since the respondents have not filed any counter- reply/affidavit, it shall be open to them to verify the records and if it is found that the petitioners had actually misrepresented the facts and/or played fraud etc. to gain CWP No.9579 of 2011.doc - 3 – the monetary benefits, to seek review of this order within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (7). Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 27.05.2011 vishal shonkar (S u r y a K a n t) Judge