Schools (Secondary Education), Birbhum, dated December 9, 1987. Accordingly, subsequently the authorities cannot revert back from its own order, to deprive the petitioner the benefit which has already been extended to him. Mr. Jahan has further stated that as directed, the petitioner has been advanced with the enhanced pay scale in Post Graduate category of scale, pursuant to the provisions of memo No. 372 Edn(B) dated July 31, 1981 and 59-GA dated January 16, 1982, of the Director of School Education. Therefore, there can be no cogent reason to doubt the legality and propriety of application of the provisions thereunder in case of the original petitioner. He has further indicated that the impugned order dated June 3, 2009, is a non speaking one in so far as the same is silent about any reasons as to why the Post Graduate scale of pay earlier granted to the original petitioner pursuant to the order of District Inspector of Schools (Secondary Education), Birbhum, dated December 9, 1987, would not be allowable to him. Mr. Jahan has indicated further that, as per the law now settled well, the benefit which has been extended to the original writ petitioner, even if, erroneously but without any part playing as to the same by the petitioner, would not have been withdrawn by the concerned respondent authority, particularly at the time of his retirement. In this regard Mr. Jahan has referred to the celebrated case of State of Punjab & Ors. vs. Rafiq Masih reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334. In this regard Mr. Jahan has also pointed out that an amount of Rs. 67,800/- has been shown to have been overdrawn by the original writ petitioner on account of salary withdrawn by him, in terms of post graduate pay scale, which is unlawful and to be set aside, he says.
