C.W.P. No. 13548 of 2009 [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No. 13548 of 2009 Date of Decision: July 6,2011 Atma Ram ................................................ Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another ...................... 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. Ramesh Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Puneet Gupta, Addl. A.G. Punjab. ... RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) This petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is for quashing the impugned order dated 4.8.2009 (Annexure P-3) vide which the salary of the petitioner has been re-fixed with effect from 1.1.1996 and it has been reduced with effect from 1.1.1998. The petitioner was appointed as a Temporary Engineer on 18.10.1982. He was promoted as Executive Engineer on 22.1.1997. The benefit of ACP scheme was C.W.P. No. 13548 of 2009 [ 2 ] granted to the petitioner with effect from 1.1.1998 in view of the instructions dated 17.4.2000 (Annexure P1). As per the audit report his salary was revised and fixed on 4.8.2009 vide Annexure P3. On 1.1.2009 his salary was fixed at `18,600/- in place of `19,100/- A recovery of `68,497/- has been ordered after calculation vide order dated 4.8.2009 (Annexure P3). At the very outset, counsel for the petitioner has restricted his prayer to the recovery being effected vide order dated 4.8.2009 (Annexure P3). He does not object to the fixation of the pay itself. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner has not played any fraud and has not misrepresented the facts to actuate the initial wrong fixation of pay given. He has relied on the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Budh Ram and others v. State of Haryana and others (C.W.P. No. 2799 of 2008 decided on 22.5.2009) reported as 2009 (3) PLR 511. The respondents have not filed their reply. However, Mr. Puneet Gupta, Addl. A.G.Punjab, has not disputed that in view of the Full Bench judgment in Budh Ram's case (supra) if there is no element of misrepresentation and fraud in wrong fixation of salary the department should not recover the excess payment made. This petition is allowed to the limited extent that C.W.P. No. 13548 of 2009 [ 3 ] the respondents will not effect the recovery of the amount already released in favour of the petitioner. In case any amount has been recovered it shall be refunded to the petitioner within four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Liberty is granted to the respondents that on verification of the facts if it is found that the petitioner has played any fraud or misrepresentation to gain monetary benefits, they may seek review of this order within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 6.7.2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) Rupi JUDGE