IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.18242 of 2006 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: MAY 26, 2009 Brij Lal Sharma .....PETITIONER Versus The Punjab State Electricity Board, Patiala and others ....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL --- Present: Mr.A.K. Walia, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Balwinder Singh and Mr.Ashish Verma, Advocate, for the respondents. .. SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. The petitioner has filed Civil Misc. application No.7418 of 2009 for disposing of the main writ petition in terms of the judgment dated 21.5.2007 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.6730 of 2006 (Karnail Singh Versus Punjab State Electricity Board, Patiala). Notice of this application was issued to the counsel for the respondents. I have heard the counsel for the parties in the main writ petition. The petitioner has filed this petition for quashing of the order dated 3.11.2006 (Annexure P9) issued by respondent No.2, whereby the benefit of higher pay scale granted to the petitioner after completion of nine years of service, has been ordered to be withheld from the date of foregoing his promotion i.e. 2.6.1993. It has further been averred that on the basis of the said order, the respondents have started recovering of the amount from the salary of the petitioner every month. As per the impugned order, withholding of the aforesaid benefit would be restored from the date of C.W.P. No.18242 of 2006 (O&M) -2- joining of the petitioner on the promoted post. During the course of arguments and in view of the decision of this Court in CWP No.6730 of 2006 (Karnail Singh Versus Punjab State Electricity Board, Patiala), decided on 21.5.2007, learned counsel for the petitioner on instructions confined his prayer only for quashing action of the respondents of recovering the amount from the petitioner while leaving the challenge to the withdrawal of advanced promotional increments and re- fixation of the salary. It is the case of the petitioner that he has already accepted the promotion on 29.12.2006. Therefore, he submitted that the amount of higher pay scale granted to the petitioner for the period 2.6.1993 to 3.11.2006 is not liable to be recovered and a part of the same has been illegally recovered from the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondents states that in view of the judgment of this Court in Karnail Singh's case (supra) and the fact that the SLP filed by the respondent-Board against the said judgment has been dismissed on 7.4.2008, the respondents will not recover the amount already paid to the petitioner as a consequence of the grant of higher pay scale. He further states that any amount, if already recovered in this regard, will be refunded to the petitioner within a period of two months. In view of the aforesaid statements made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents not to recover the amount already paid to the petitioner in view of order dated 3.11.2006 (Annexure P9), and if any amount has already been recovered, the same shall be refunded to the petitioner within a period of two months. May 26, 2009 (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) vkg JUDGE