CW 1962/96 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Civil Writ Petition No.1962/96 Prahlad Versus State & Others. Date of Order ::: 28/08/09 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi None, for petitioner Mr. SD Khaspuria for Mr. Hari Barath, Addl. Govt. Counsel Instant petition has been filed assailing order dt.24/02/96 (Ann.4) whereby pay scales were revised being diploma holder w.e.f. 29/08/79 and it was further ordered that excess salary drawn by him be recovered. Petitioner having qualification of B.Tech. from Regional College of Ajmer (University of Rajasthan) being equivalent to diploma in Mechanical Engineer, was appointed as Junior Engineer (Degree holder) vide order dt.29/08/79 on temporary basis in pay scale of Rs.470-880/-. It is pertinent to mention that those who were degree holder, get additional increments by pay fixation in higher stage in pay scale of the post – in pursuance whereof, petitioner got fixed at basic pay of Rs.630/- admissible to degree holder Engineers. Later on, it appears that when it came to the notice of respondents authority that the petitioner was not degree holder; as such notice was served upon calling for personal CW 1962/96 //2// hearing on 11/12/95 and after affording opportunity of hearing, order impugned was passed on 24/02/96 (Ann.4) and being diploma holder, he was fixed in pay scale at Rs.470/- as Sub-Engineer (mechanical) w.e.f. 29/08/79 – as a result of revision of pay from the date of appointment, recovery was directed to be made from his salary. It is not the case of respondents that petitioner has misrepresented or concealed the facts at the time of entry into service – pursuant to advertisement, he applied for treating him to be eligible, was considered and on being successful, was appointed as Junior Engineer (Degree holder) vide order dt. 29/08/79, which has been reproduced in para 1 of the petition. However, later on when it came to the notice of respondents that he being diploma holder, was not entitled for advance increments and fixation at higher stage of pay scale of the post and after due compliance of principles of natural justice, order impugned was passed on 24/02/96 (Ann.4). There is no material placed on record by which it can be inferred that petitioner is degree holder and was entitled to continue at higher stage of Rs.630/- in pay scale of Rs. 470-880/- at the time of appointment passed on CW 1962/96 //3// 29/08/79. Thus this Court does not find any infirmity or illegality being committed by respondents in revising starting pay of petitioner in pay scale of Rs.470-880/- being B.Tech equivalent to diploma holder, on being appointed as Sub-Engineer (Mech.) Diploma Holder. As regards order for making recovery pursuant to order dt.24/02/96 (Ann.4), as there was no concealment or misrepresentation on the part of petitioner at the time of entry into service, therefore, respondents cannot be justified to make recovery. Even this Court vide interim order dt.12/09/96, stayed the recovery to be made from petitioner pursuant to order impugned and application filed U/ Art.226 (3) of the Constitution was rejected vide order dt.17/01/97 while making interim order dt. 12/09/96 absolute. This Court also finds substance that recovery cannot be made of payment having already been made prior to order impugned. Consequently, writ petition is partly allowed. Order dt.24/02/96 (Ann.4) as regards recovery impugned stands set aside. No costs. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p3/ 1962CW96-Aug27Ds.doc