C.W.P. No. 8680 of 2009 [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 8680 of 2009 Date of Decision: Aug. 9, 2011 Bhushan Kumar ............................................ Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ................... Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Ritu Bahri 1.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. Akshay Kumar Goel, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Praveen Chander Goyal, Addl. A.G. Punjab. ... RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) The petitioner is seeking a writ of Certiorari for quashing the order dated 12.2.2009 (Annexure P3) vide which the date of regularization of the petitioner has been changed from 24.6.1982 to 29.10.1985 and his salary has been re-fixed. Petitioner has joined as Draftsman on 24.6.1982. His services were regularized with effect from 24.6.1982 vide Annexure P2. Vide judgment dated 16.12.1991 passed C.W.P. No. 8680 of 2009 [ 2 ] in C.W.P. No. 10108 of 1991 the seniority fixed by the respondents from the initial date of appointment was upheld. The final seniority-list of the Draftsmen has been prepared vide order dated 21.9.1988. Since this date the petitioner has been enjoying the benefit of adhoc service rendered by him towards seniority. Grievance of the petitioner is that vide order dated 12.2.2009 (Annexure P3), on an objection by the Audit department, his date of regularization has been changed from 24.6.1982 to 29.10.1985. His pay has been re-fixed and consequential benefits given under the proficiency step-up increments on completing 8, 16 and 24 years of service have also been changed. Pursuant to this order, recovery is being sought from the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the seniority fixed on 21.9.1988 cannot be disturbed after a gap of more than 20 years as the orders of regularizing his services were passed way back on 5.11.1985 (Annexure P2). No affidavit has been filed by the respondents disputing the factual position. It is not the case of the respondents that the benefit accrued to the petitioner had been by misrepresentation or fraud. The Supreme Court in Sahib Ram v. State of Haryana and others 1994 (5) SLR 753 and the Full Bench of this Court in Budh Ram and others v. C.W.P. No. 8680 of 2009 [ 3 ] State of Haryana and others 2009 (3) PLR 511 has examined the recovery on the basis of wrong fixation of pay. It has been held that any benefit granted, if not based on misrepresentation or fraud, shall not be taken back. In view of the above, the order dated 12.2.2009 (Annexure P3) is quashed and the amount recovered in pursuance to this order be returned back to the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order subject to verification of facts. 9.8.2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) Rupi JUDGE