CWP No. 8142 CAT of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 8142 CAT of 2010 Date of decision:06.05.2010 Union of India and others ...Petitioners Versus Central Administrative Tribunal and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.Rajiv Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. 1. To be referred to the reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M.KUMAR, J. The only issue raised in the instant petition filed by the Union of India against the judgment dated 31.10.2007 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (OA No.866 PB-2003) is whether any recovery could be effected from an employee, who has been given monetary benefits. It is not disputed that inadvertently financial benefits were granted to employee- respondent by releasing him selection grade and he was placed under 10% of the posts, which were to be upgraded in the higher scale. The Tribunal by following the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sahib Ram v. State of Haryana and others, 1994(1) SLR 753 took the view that the benefit could be withdrawn but recovery could not be CWP No. 8142 CAT of 2010 2 effected. The petitioner had withdrawn the order granting him selection grade but a show cause notice for recovery was issued to employee-respondent. The benefit was withdrawn and the recovery was sought to be effected from him. However, the Tribunal has quashed the order to the extent of effecting recovery from the employee-respondent. The amount which was recovered was directed to be refunded to him. After hearing the learned counsel, we do not find any legal infirmity warranting admission of the petition. As a matter of fact, a Full Bench of this Court after considering a number of judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court as well as other Courts has held in Budh Ram and others v. State of Haryana and others, 2009(3) SCT 333 that no recovery could be effected in the absence of any fraud or misrepresentation. Accordingly, the writ petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed. (M.M.KUMAR) JUDGE 06.05.2010 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) mk JUDGE