IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.17289 of 2009 Date of Decision : April 05, 2010. Bhagwan Dass .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.S.K.Rattan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Ms.Charu Tuli, Senior DAG, Punjab. -.- 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? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioner was working as a Dozer Operator under respondent No.3, and he has retired on 29.2.2004 on attaining the age of superannuation. He seeks quashing of the order dated 06.02.2004 (Annexure P-4) whereby his pay has been adversely refixed and consequential recovery of Rs.66,873/- is sought to be effected from him. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the parties are ad-idem that the controversy involved in this case stands settled by a decision dated 27.5.2009 rendered by this Court in a bunch of writ petitions including CWP No.5568 of 2008 (Charan Dass and others versus State of Punjab and others), the concluding para whereof reads as C.W.P.No .17289 of 2009 2 follows:- “In view of the above, the respondents are not entitled to effect any recovery from the petitioners either on account of retrenchment increments or special increments allegedly erroneously given. However, the respondents are entitled to re-fix the emoluments by reducing the special increment only. Consequently, the pay of the petitioners will be re-fixed and in case of those employees who have already retired from service, the retiral benefits shall be released within a period of two months. The petitioners shall also be entitled to interest on the delayed payment of pension/retiral benefits at the statutory rate wherever admissible and at the rate of 6% on pension and other retiral benefits where statutory interest is not provided for. Any amount deducted from the retiral benefits of the salary of the petitioners shall be refunded within the aforesaid period.” The writ petition is accordingly allowed in part in terms of the afore-stated decision of this Court in CWP No.5568 of 2008 (Charan Dass and others versus State of Punjab and others). Dasti. April 05, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE