Regular Second Appeal No. 3080 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Regular Second Appeal No. 3080 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision: 27.3.2009 *** Gurbachan Singh .. Appellant VS. State of Punjab & Ors. .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR, Present:- Mr. Padamkant Dwivedi, Advocate for the appellant. *** ARVIND KUMAR, J. CM No. 1783-C of 2009 Heard. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and the appeal is restored to its original number. RSA No. 3080 of 2008 On request, the appeal is taken on Board for hearing, today itself. This is plaintiff's regular second appeal filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908(for brevity 'the Code'), questioning the legality and impropriety of judgments and decrees passed by the Courts below dismissing his suit for declaration filed against the orders dated 22.12.2003 and 27.1.2004 withdrawing the selection grade granted to him w.e.f. 1.1.1986 and consequent recovery effected from the amount of his leave encashment. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant, this Court is of the considered view that no question of law warranting admission of the appeal arises for determination in this appeal. It emerges out from the record that the defendant-Department produced over-whelming evidence on record to show that the said selection grade was inadvertently granted to him as he Regular Second Appeal No. 3080 of 2008 2 was found having blemish service record. He was awarded punishment to stoppage of annual increments from 1.1.1986 to 29.2.1992; his confidential reports were also not good since in the annual confidential report for the year 1984-85, i.e. immediately prior to the year he was conferred with selection grade, an adverse entry regarding his integrity as doubtful was made. Admittedly, the selection grade is to be granted to an employee with good service record as per government instructions, but in view of the fact that the plaintiff is not having good service record, both the Courts below rightly held that the Department was well within his right to withdraw the selection grade which was granted to him inadvertently, by rectifying the mistake and consequential asking for the recovery of excess payment made to him due to wrong grant of selection grade, which accordingly was withdrawn and his salary was re-fixed, resulting into the recovery made effective from the amount lying with the Department of the leave encashment of the plaintiff since he stood retired on 31.8.2002. Although, it has been contended by learned counsel for the appellant in context of various judicial pronouncements that the benefit once paid, though in excess, cannot be recovered from an employee, but since the plaintiff in fact was not entitled to the monetary benefits which he had received; he was wrongly given selection grade contrary to the Rules and he enjoyed the fruits thereof and due to which a burden has put on the State Exchequer irrespective of the fact that his integrity was doubted by the competent authority, the recovery of the same has rightly been effected from him because if the recovery was not ordered then it worked as a supplement to the mis-deeds of dishonest employee. Nothing has been shown to take a contrary view. There are concurrent findings of fact recorded by both the Courts below. The findings are based on cogent evidence, oral as well as documentary, and it cannot be concluded that the findings are laconic or they lack the support of evidence. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed in limine. (ARVIND KUMAR) JUDGE March 27,2009 Jiten