CWP No.20569 of 2008.doc - 1 – HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.20569 of 2008 Date of Decision: 15.09.2010 **** Mohd. Naseer . . . . Petitioner VS. State of Punjab & Ors. . . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. BS Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. H.S. Brar, Addl. AG Punjab Mr. Amit Mehta, Advocate for respondent No.4 ***** SURYA KANT J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner was holding the post of Superintendent Grade-II in Zila Parishad, Sangrur when he retired w.e.f. March 31, 2007 on attaining the age of superannuation. The impugned order dated 12.02.2008 (Annexure P1) has been passed thereafter ordering recovery of Rs.47,346/- on account of re-fixation of the date of grant of ACP to the petitioner. CWP No.20569 of 2008.doc - 2 – (2). There is indeed no quarrel that the ACP pay- scales have been granted to the employees to remove stagnation in their service career. The petitioner was also granted the ACP for this very object as has been acknowledged by the Zila Parishad, Sangrur in its memo dated 13.08.2007 (Annexure P15) sent to the Controller, Panchayati Raj (Finance), the relevant part whereof reads as follows :- xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx Para No.19 According to audit note para No.10 (3) of the Examiner Local Fund Account Punjab Chandigarh for the month 4/95 to 3/96, a basic pay of the official was fixed Rs.1850/- instead of Rs.1900/- but afterwards this audit para was settled. So keeping in view the basic pay Rs.1900 of the official, in revised pay scale the pay of the official was fixed Rs.6000/- per month is correct. Photo copy attached. Para No.20 The official remain in the same cadre throughout that’s why a benefit of 24th year increment has been given. This given benefit according to cadre is correct. xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx CWP No.20569 of 2008.doc - 3 – (3). The respondents in their reply/affidavit have not disputed the fact that the petitioner was granted ACP as he remained in the same cadre throughout or that the ‘audit objection’ against his pay- fixation also stood rectified and settled. The reply/affidavit merely refers to the objection raised by the Controller (Finance) without adverting to the factual basis to raise such objection. The impugned notice is not only liable to be quashed for non-compliance of the principles of natural justice, it is also apparent that the petitioner was rightly granted the ACP and there was no error in the fixation of his pay which could need correction by the Controller (Finance). (4). For the reasons afore-stated, the impugned order dated 12.02.2008/03.06.2008 (Annexure P1 & P2, respectively) as well as the subsequent action in effecting recovery from the petitioner is hereby quashed. The respondents are directed to refund the amount recovered from petitioner and to release his retiral dues within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (5). Ordered accordingly. (6). Dasti . CWP No.20569 of 2008.doc - 4 – (SURYA KANT) JUDGE 15.09.2010 vishal shonkar