LPA No. 397 of 2010 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh. LPA No. 397 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 23.03.2010 Punjab State Electricity Board and others ....Appellants. Versus Gurmail Singh ....Respondents. Coram:- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel Hon'ble Mr. Justice Alok Singh 1.Whether reporters of local news papers may be allowed to see judgement ? 2. To be referred to reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? Present: Ms. Madhu Dayal, Addl. A.G., Punjab for the appellants. ... Alok Singh, J. 1. Challenge in the present appeal is to the judgement dated 20.10.2009 whereby learned Single Judge has quashed the order dated 18.7.2007, deducting Rs.3,41,059 from the pension and gratuity of the petitioner and directed the appellant to re-fix the pension of the petitioner and to pay the aforesaid amount within three months thereafter. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner joined the service on 31.7.1978 as a direct recruit on the post of junior engineer and remained on the said post till 28.2.2006 when he stood retired on attaining the age of superannuation. After the retirement of the petitioner, respondent No.3 LPA No. 397 of 2010 2 passed the impugned order dated 18.7.2007 to deduct an amount of Rs.3,41,059/- from the pension and gratuity of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner was promoted to the post of AAE vide order dated 19.9.2003 but he did not join the promotional post and retired from the Board as junior engineer on 28.2.2006 and hence, it would be deemed that the petitioner had foregone his promotion, hence, benefit of proficiency step-up as well as first and second time bound promotional scale granted to the petitioner vide order dated 11.1.1990, 4.2.1992 and 3.9.1996 have been cancelled and withdrawn by the appellants - respondents. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the record. 4. Undisputedly, the petitioner did not play any fraud or misrepresented the respondents - employer. The petitioner was granted benefit of proficiency step up and was granted time-bound promotion, time bound promotional scale on completion of 9/19 years of service by the respondents and he was being paid salary by the department till he retired on 28.2.2006 on attaining the age of superannuation. Undisputedly, before his retirement, no order was ever passed or communicated to the petitioner that on account of foregoing promotion from the post of AAE, benefits already granted to the petitioner were liable to be withdrawn. After about one and a half years from the date of retirement of the petitioner, impugned order was passed. 5. Since the petitioner has not played any fraud or misrepresented in the matter of benefit of proficiency step up, time bound promotion and time bound pay scale, and hence, the same cannot be withdrawn after the retirement of the petitioner. LPA No. 397 of 2010 3 6. In view of the above, we find no illegality with the view taken by learned Single Judge. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. ( Alok Singh ) Judge ( Adarsh Kumar Goel ) Judge 23.03.2010 sk.