C.M. NO.12770 OF 2010 CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.19395 OF 2003 (0&M) :{ 1 }: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH DATE OF DECISION: JANUARY 14, 2011 Bikanu Ram .....Petitioner VERSUS Bhakra Beas Management Board, Chandigarh and others ....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? PRESENT: None for the petitioner. Mr. N. S. Bawa, Advocate, for respondent Nos.1 and 2. **** RANJIT SINGH, J. (ORAL) The writ petition initially was filed by the petitioner, praying for issuance of writ of mandamus for quashing Annexure P-5, whereby the respondent-Board had ordered effecting recovery of excess payment made to the petitioner as benefit of one increment of proficiency step was wrongly granted. The writ petition was admitted. Application now has been filed to plead that sum of `84,785/- on account of excess payment has been illegally withheld out of the retiral benefits of the petitioner on his retirement. The plea C.M. NO.12770 OF 2010 CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.19395 OF 2003 (0&M) :{ 2 }: is that the petitioner has not made any misrepresentation or committed any fraud, when this benefit was granted to him. As per the petitioner, no recovery, thus, can be effected from his retiral benefits in view of the judgement passed by this Court in case of Budh Ram etc. Vs. State of Haryana, 2009(3) SCT 333. Notice of the application was issued to counsel for the Board and Mr.N.S.Bawa, Advocate, has put in appearance. He very fairly states that proposition of law as canvassed in the application would cover the issue involved in the writ petition. Since the issue involved is covered by the decision of this Court, in the interest of justice, the main writ petition is taken up for hearing today itself. The recovery, which has been effected from the pay and allowances and other pensionary benefits payable to the petitioner, can not be withheld as there was no misrepresentation or fraud on the part of the petitioner. Consequently, the order, directing recovery, is quashed. The amount, if any, recovered shall be released to the petitioner within a period of one month from today. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. January 14 ,2011 (RANJIT SINGH ) khurmi JUDGE