LPA No. 591 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. LPA No. 591 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision 28 .3.2011 Mahesh Chand etc. ... Appellants Versus National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research .. Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present: Mr.Amit Mehta,Advocate for the appellants 1. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 2. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.KUMAR, J. The instant appeal filed under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against judgement dated 28.2.2011 rendered by the learned Single Judge holding that once the necessary benefits including the arrears were disbursed to the appellants without any pre-check and with the understanding that any excess payment made could be recovered then it could not be claimed that no such recovery could be made. The appellants have given an undertaking in this regard that in the event of excess payment the same would be liable to be recovered on account of incorrect fixation of pay or on account of any other discrepancy. A specimen proforma of the undertaking so obtained was placed on record as Annexure III. It was subsequently found that certain payments including personal pay have been made which was not admissible to the appellants and in accordance with the undertaking (Annexure III) recovery was liable to effected. The learned Single Judge has held that propositions (i) and (ii) of the judgement of the LPA No. 591 of 2011 2 Full Bench rendered in the case of Budh Ram v. State of Haryana 2009(3) SCT 333 would not be attracted to the facts of the present case because the payment was made by the respondents after a conscious decision and after obtaining an undertaking in that regard. On the contrary the cases which have been covered under category (iii) of the judgement in Budh Ram's case (supra) would cover the instant appeal even more emphatically. In the present case the appellants were not only aware but have also given an undertaking for refund of excess amount paid to them because it was without any pre-check. Once the factual position is in the aforesaid terms then there is no escape from the conclusion that the appellants cannot retain the underserving benefits received by them. There is thus no ground for admission of the appeal and the same is hereby dismissed. (M.M.Kumar) Judge (T.P.S. Mann) 28.3.2011 Judge okg