IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Civil Writ Petition No. 14916 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION : OCTOBER 14, 2009 HARBANS KAUR ....... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. .... RESPONDENT(S) CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: Mr. Padamkant Dwivedi, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. BS Chahal, DAG, Punjab. AJAI LAMBA, J. (Oral) This petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed praying for issuance of a writ directing the respondents not to effect recovery from the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been drawing family pension on account of death of her husband-Shri Tarsem Lal, who expired on 30.6.2001. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that it is the Civil Writ Petition No. 14916 of 2009 2 stand of respondent No.4 that the pension amount to the tune of Rs.47,000/- (approximately) was paid in excess to the petitioner, as the basic pension of the petitioner was required to be reduced with effect from July, 2008. The reduction, however, was not made. Learned counsel for the petitioner, while relying on the judgment rendered by Full Bench of this Court in CWP 2799 of 2008 (Budh Ram and others v. state of Haryana and others) decided on 22.5.2009, contends that the respondents have no right to effect recovery as the petitioner did not actuate the payment of excess amount of family pension by way of fraud or making any misrepresentation. Learned counsel for the respondent-State contends that, indeed, in regard to recovery, the matter is covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in Budh Ram's case (supra). Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this petition is allowed to the limited extent that the respondents would have no right to effect recovery from the pension of the petitioner. Consequently, it is directed that any amount recovered from the petitioner in the interregnum period will be refunded to the petitioner within 4 months of receipt of certified copy of this order. October 14, 2009 ( AJAI LAMBA ) Kang JUDGE 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?