IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.245 of 2006 Md. Sirajul Haque, son of Late Md. Abdul Shakur, resident of Village –Kalo, Police Station Bikram, District Patna Versus 1. The Bihar State Electricity Board through its Chairman, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 2. The Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 3. The Additional Secretary, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 4. The Director of Personnel, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 5. The Financial Controller-I, Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 6. The Financial Controller(Audit), Bihar State Electricity Board, Vidyut Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 7. The General Manager-cum- Chief Engineer, Central Area Electricity Board, Patna 8. The Superintending Engineer, Electric Supply Circle, Patna 9. The Executive Engineer, Electric Supply Division, Bihta, Patna 04/ 16.09.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the Bihar State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board). 2. Petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Financial Controller of the Board, bearing Memo No. 968 dated 23.4.2002, Annexure-1, whereunder a sum of 67,826.30 has been directed to be recovered from the gratuity payable to the petitioner on account of excess salary received by him. 3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that 2 payment of excess salary to him was not on account of any misrepresentation made by the petitioner, rather, it was on account of the mistake committed by the authorities of the Board. In case excess payment was made to the petitioner on account of the mistake by the authorities of the Board, recovery should have been made from his salary before his retirement. Petitioner retired with effect from 31.1.2001, as has been stated in paragraph 10 of the writ petition. After his retirement, impugned order, bearing Memo No. 968 dated 23.4.2002, Annexure-1 was passed directing for recovery of the excess amount of 67,826.30 paid to him as salary. In support of the aforesaid submission, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Syed Abdul Qadir & Ors. Vrs. State of Bihar & Ors, reported in 2009(2) PLJR 74(SC) and in the light of the direction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court not to recover the amount of excess salary paid to the employee on account of the mistake of the employer, I direct that amount of excess salary paid to the petitioner recovered in compliance of the order , bearing Memo No. 968 dated 23.4.2002, Annexure-1 from his 3 gratuity amounting to 67,826.30 be refunded to the petitioner, as early as possible, in any case within three months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order before the Financial Controller of the Board. 4. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of. Arjun/ ( V. N. Sinha, J.)