Partly allowed

Baldev Singh v. Pseb and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC18 Apr 2009CWP/18480/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged order withdrawing promotional scale and sanctioning recovery. Respondent conceded recovery would not be effected but salary would be re-fixed. Court disposed of petition directing no recovery and restoration of benefits upon acceptance of promotional post.

What did the court decide?

Direction to not recover amount already paid. Salary to be re-fixed per circulars. Benefits to be restored if petitioner accepts promotional post.

Baldev Singh Vs Pseb and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2009)

¶1

C.W.P. No. 18480 of 2008

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

C.W.P. No. 18480 of 2008 Decided on : 18-04-2009

Baldev Singh

....Petitioner

VERSUS

Punjab State Electricity Board, Patiala and others.

¶9

....Respondents

¶10

CORAM:-HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL .

¶11

Present:Mr. Ashish Grover, Advocate for Mr. Sudhir Purthi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajiv Malhotra, Advocate for the respondents.

¶12

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J (Oral).

¶13

The petitioner has filed this petition for quashing of the order dated 3.7.2008 (Annexure P-4) passed by respondent No.2 only to the extent whereby it has been ordered that the time bound promotional scale which was granted on the completion of 9/16/23 years of service tenure, will be withdrawn till the joining of the promotional post and the order dated 21.8.2008 (Annexure P-7) passed by respondent No.3, whereby the sanction of recovery has been ordered in pursuance to the aforesaid order, being illegal and arbitrary.

¶14

At the time of arguments, in view of the decision given by this Court in Karnail singh Vs. Punjab State Electricity Board, Patiala (C.W.P. No.6730 of 2006) decided on 21.5.2007, learned counsel for the petitioner confined his prayer only for quashing of the recovery order

¶15

C.W.P. No. 18480 of 2008

¶16

-2-

¶17

(Annexure P-7) while leaving the challenge to the withdrawal of advanced promotional increments and re-fixation of the salary in accordance with impugned order dated 3.7.2008 (Annexure P-4).

¶18

Learned counsel for the respondents on instructions received from the Board has fairly conceded that as far as the recovery of the payment, which has been made, will not be effected from the petitioner. However, his pay will be refixed according to the clarification/circular dated 10.11.2004 and 31.12.2004 issued by the Board and in view of order dated 3.7.2008 (Annexure P-4)

¶19

In view of the said statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondents, this petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents not to recover the amount already paid to the petitioner. However, it will be open to the respondent-Board to re-fix the salary in terms of the relevant circular. As and when the petitioner accepts the promotional post, the aforesaid benefits which have been withdrawn will be restored in accordance with the circular dated 10.11.2004 and 31.12.2004.

¶20

18^th April, 2009. Monika

¶21

(SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE

Baldev Singh v. Pseb and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Baldev Singh v. Pseb and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S P M Electronics Vs P S E B

Sumitra Devi Vs Uhbvn Ltd. and Ors.

Satbir Singh Vs Registrar, Coop. Societies and Anr.

Harjinder Singh Vs Joint Registrar Coop. Societies Patiala and Ors.

Sham Lal Garg Vs State of Punjab and Others

Bimla Devi Vs Pseb