Petitioner challenged an order deducting Rs.68,233 from his pension due to wrong pay fixation. Applying prior precedents, the court held no recovery could be made despite alleged innocence, quashing the order.
Quashing of the recovery order dated 04.11.2008 and direction to respondents to refund any recovered amount within three months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CWP No.13725 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 02.08.2011
Nand Kishore
VS.
State of Punjab & Ors.
. . . . Respondents
CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT
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?
Present: Mr. Tribhawan Singla, Advocate for the petitioner ****
SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL)
CWP No.13725 of 2011.doc
(4). Applying the ratio decidendi of the Full Bench decision in Budh Ram & Others vs. State of Haryana & Others, 2009(3) PLR 511 as well as the decision by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Registrar, Cooperative Societies Haryana and others v. Israil Khan and others, (2010) 1 SCC 440 , I am of the considered view that no recovery can be effected from the petitioner.
(5). Consequently, the writ petition is allowed in part and the recovery order dated 04.11.2008 (Annexure P3) is quashed. The respondents are directed to refund the amount if any already recovered from the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
(6). Since the respondents have not filed any counterreply/affidavit, it shall be open to them to verify the records and if it is found that the petitioner had actually misrepresented the facts and/or played fraud etc. to gain the monetary benefits, to seek review of this order within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
(7). Ordered accordingly. Dasti .
02.08.2011
vishal shonkar
(S u r y a K a n t) Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the recovery order for deduction from pensionary benefits due to wrong fixation of pay can be quashed in light of the Full Bench decision in Budh Ram.
Whether the petitioner can seek recovery if it is subsequently found he misrepresented facts or played fraud to gain monetary benefits.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Budh Ram & Others vs. State of Haryana & OthersApplied¶22
Budh Ram & Others vs. State of Haryana & Others, 2009(3) PLR 511
Registrar, Cooperative Societies Haryana and others v. Israil Khan and othersApplied¶22
Registrar, Cooperative Societies Haryana and others v. Israil Khan and others, (2010) 1 SCC 440 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Nand Kishore
State of Punjab
Surya Kant
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
