Allowed

Gurwinder Singh v. Bbmb and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC16 Aug 2023CWP/7307/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, an employee sought to prevent salary recovery due to a clerical error in his appointment letter which inflates his grade pay. The court applied the Rafiq Masih precedent to restrain recovery of past salary drawn at the erroneous higher grade pay but granted entitlement to the reduced salary prospectively from the corrigendum date.

What did the court decide?

Respondents restrained from recovering salary paid at Rs.2150 grade pay; petitioner entitled to Rs.1950 grade pay from 14.05.2019.

Gurwinder Singh Vs Bbmb and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2023)

2023:PHHC:105505

CWP-7307-2021

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶5

201

¶6

CWP-7307-2021 Date of Decision : 16.08.2023

Gurwinder Singh

......... Petitioner

Versus

Bhakra Beas Management Board and others

¶11

......... Respondents

¶12

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGMOHAN BANSAL

¶13

Present : Mr.H.K.Brinda, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶14

Mr.Anil Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the respondents.

¶15

¶16

JAGMOHAN BANSAL, J. (Oral)

¶17

The petitioner through instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking directions to respondents not to reduce his salary and further effect recovery with respect to already paid salary.

¶18

The petitioner came to be appointed vide letter dated 07.04.2015 as Gauge Reader in the scale of 5200-10680 plus grade pay of Rs.2150/- by the respondent-Bhakra Beas Management Board (BBMB). The respondent-Board is following pay scale and other emoluments granted by PSPCL. The Board during the course of scrutiny of documents found that in the appointment letter of the petitioner, grade pay has been wrongly mentioned as Rs.2150/- whereas it should be Rs.1950/-. On the basis of said opinion, the respondent-Board vide corrigendum dated 14.05.2019 ordered that grade pay of Rs.2150/- be read as Rs.1950/- in the appointment letter issued to the petitioner. The respondent in view of reduction of grade ANJU GOEL 2023.08.16 18:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶19

2023:PHHC:105505

¶20

CWP-7307-2021 -2-

¶21

pay has started recovery of Rs.5,000/- per month from the salary drawn by the petitioner.

¶22

Mr.H.K.Brinda, learned counsel for the petitioner asserts that respondent in view of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Punjab vs. Rafiq Masih, 2015(4) SCC 334 , cannot effect recovery with respect to salary already paid. There was no mistake on the part of the petitioner and case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rafiq Masih's case (supra) . The petitioner does not dispute his salary for the future period considering grade pay Rs.1950/-.

¶23

On being confronted with afore-cited judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court, learned counsel for the respondent expressed his inability to distinguish facts of the present case from the said judgment, however, he submits that the petitioner cannot take advantage of mistake of the respondent and from the date of issuance of corrigendum, he cannot claim salary with grade pay Rs.2150/-.

¶24

In the wake of statements of learned counsel for both the parties and judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rafiq Masih's case (supra), the respondents are hereby restrained from effecting recovery with respect to salary already paid considering grade pay Rs.2150/-, however, petitioner w.e.f. 14.05.2019 i.e. date of corrigendum shall be entitled to salary with grade pay Rs.1950/-.

¶25

The petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

¶26

16.08.2023	(	JAGMOHAN BANSAL ) JUDGE
anju
	Whether speaking/reasoned	Yes/No
	Whether Reportable	Yes/No

¶27

ANJU GOEL 2023.08.16 18:56 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Gurwinder Singh v. Bbmb and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurwinder Singh v. Bbmb 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 Rajpura Service Station Vs Bharat Petroleum Corp Ltd. and Ors.

M/S Rajpura Service Station Vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited and Others

Anil Kumar and Ors. Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Anil Kumar Sarma Vs Uunion of India and Anr.

Kusum Vs Punjab National Bank Centenary Rural Development Trust and Others

Karan Singh Yadav Vs Union of India and Another