SBCWP NO.6860/97. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6860/1997. Bhagwat Singh Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of Order:- March 5, 2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri Prashant Chahar on behalf of Shri Biri Singh for the petitioner. Shri S.D. Khaspuria, Additional Government Counsel for the State. **** BY THE COURT:- This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 12/10/1995 (Ann.15), by which, pay scale of 2000-3200 which was granted to him w.e.f. 15/5/1995 on completion of 27 years of service in terms of Government Circular dated 25/1/1992 was sought to be reduced to 1640-2900. 2) Contention of Shri Prashant Chahar, learned counsel for petitioner is that once Selection Scale in the pay scale of 2000-3200 was granted to the petitioner and petitioner started getting salary in that pay scale, respondents unilaterally could not withdraw the said pay scale and make recovery. In the meantime, petitioner SBCWP NO.6860/97. 2 retired and a sum of Rs.20,000/- was deducted from the amount of his Gratuity. Learned counsel for petitioner cited the judgment of Supreme Court in Shyam Babu Verma & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors. : (194) 2 SCC 521 and argued that if certain payments have been made in excess owing to any mistake on the part of the authorities of the department, the employee cannot be made to suffer on that account and recovery of such amount cannot be made. 3) Shri S.D. Khaspuria, learned Additional Government Counsel opposed the writ petition and submitted that pay scale of 2000-3200 was erroneously granted to the petitioner. Subsequently, a clarification was issued vide order dated 3/10/1994 by the Government to say that cases of Gram Sewaks not having any avenue of promotion were regulated by clause (v) of the Circular dated 25/1/1992 in which, corresponding scale of pay prescribed is as 1640-2900. Recovery was rightly made therefore no notice was required. 4) Upon hearing the learned counsel for parties and perusing the material on record, I find that the Officer-in-Charge of the respondents in paras 2 and 4 of the Additional Affidavit filed on 15/9/2005 himself has admitted that they themselves forwarded case of such employees to the Government and the same has been exempted by the Government vide Order No.F.173/47/Accounts/Gram SBCWP NO.6860/97. 3 Vikas/Vetan Niam/4291-99 dated 23/6/2001. In any case, if any amount which has been paid on account of any mistake on the part of the departmental authorities which was not owing to any fraud or misrepresentation on the part of the petitioner, no recovery can be made. 5) In the result, writ petition is partly allowed. Respondents are directed to refund the recovered amount from the Gratuity of the petitioner to him together with interest @9% p.a. 6) Compliance of the judgment shall be made within a period of three months from the date copy of this judgment is produced before the respondents. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil