SBCWP1673/1997 // 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1673/1997 {Arjun Lal Raigar Vs. State of Rajasthan and Others} Date of Order ::: 04.02.2010 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq Shri Manish Sharma for Shri S.P. Sharma, Counsel for petitioner Shri Hari Bareth, Deputy Government Counsel for respondents #### By the Court:- This writ petition has been filed by petitioner Arjun Lal Raigar with prayer that order dated 06.03.1997, by which pay scale of Rs.950-1680 granted to him by order dated 20.07.1995, under the Revised Pay Scale Rules, 1989, was withdrawn and instead he was fixed in pay scale of Rs.910-1520, and accordingly it was directed that he shall be entitled to selection grades in terms of the Government Circular dated 25.01.1992; further prayer has been made by the petitioner that, in view the pay scale of 950-1680, the petitioner is entitled to be granted pay scale of Rs.1200- 2050 as second selection grade which was correctly granted to him vide order dated SBCWP1673/1997 // 2 // 19.06.1995. Contention of Shri Manish Sharma, holding brief of Shri S.P. Sharma, learned counsel for petitioner, is that the petitioner had acquired qualification of secondary in 1983, but originally when he was promoted on ad hoc basis on the post of Tracer in 1981 he did not possess this qualification. His further contention is that he has even acquired the qualification of ITI. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that question with regard to such qualification of the petitioner was examined by this Court in earlier writ petition being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6831/1994, titled as Arjun Lal Raigar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Another, decided on 16.10.2008. Learned counsel for the petitioner further argued that so far as recovery part is concerned, since the petitioner did not misrepresent or misled the respondents, recovery of excess amount paid to him cannot be made. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Paras Nath Singh Vs. State of Bihar & Others – (2009) 6 SCC 314. Learned counsel for respondents submits SBCWP1673/1997 // 3 // that such qualification certificates were never produced by the petitioner before the respondents. A wrong pay-fixation has been corrected, therefore, no notice was necessary. Having regard to the facts narrated above, this writ petition is allowed in part. The orders to the extent they seek to make recovery from the petitioner are declared illegal. However, for rest part of the prayer the petitioner may make a fresh representation to the respondents producing therewith his qualification certificates, which the respondents shall consider and examine in accordance with the law, and pass fresh order within a period of three months from the date a copy of this judgment is produced before them. (Mohammad Rafiq) J. //Jaiman//