Ram Pravesh Pandey v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.278 of 2011 =========================================================== Ram Pravesh Pandey, S/O Late Hardas Pandey, R/O Village-Purana Bhojpur, P.S.- Dumraon, Distt.-Buxar .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar 2.The Engineer-In-Chief, Pariyojana Sanyojak Nalkoop Prabhag R/O Bishwawaraiya Bhavan, Bailey Road, Patna
3. The Chief Engineer (South), Tube Well Division, Patna
4. The Superintending Engineer, Tube Well Circle, Arrah, Bhojpur
5. The Executive Engineer, Tubewell Division, Buxar
6. The Accountant General, Bihar, Patna .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. K.N. Choubey, Sr. Advocate Mr. Ambuj Nayan Chaubey, Advocate Mr. Ashok Kumar Garg, Advocate Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate Mr. Yogendra Kumar Dwivedi, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Prasoon Sinha GA-2 For Accountant General : Mr. J.P. Karn, Sr. Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.N. SINHA ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 27-03-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and AC to GA-2 for the State.
2. Petitioner superannuated while serving as Tubewell Operator in the Tube-well Division, Buxar with effect from 31.01.2010. He has filed this writ petition assailing the office order bearing Letter No. 571 dated 10.06.2010, Annexure-1 passed by the Executive Engineer of the said division whereunder a sum of Rs. 1,56,289/- is sought to be recovered from the petitioner on the ground that the said amount was paid in excess during the period between
Patna High Court CWJC No.278 of 2011 dt.27-03-2015 2/2 01.03.1989-31.01.2010 pursuant to his first Time Bound Promotion in the light of the Government instruction dated 23.03.1987 which has since been cancelled under letter nos. 320, 321, 322 dated 16.03.2010.
3. Petitioner having not misrepresented for obtaining the first time bound promotion which has been cancelled after his retirement, there is no justification at all to recover the aforesaid amount. In this connection, I may refer to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab & Ors. etc. v. Rafiq Masih (While Washer) etc. 2015(1) PLJR 261(SC). Accordingly, officer order bearing Letter No. 571 dated 10.06.2010, Annexure-1 is quashed with direction to the Executive Engineer, Tube-well Division, Buxar to make payment of the aforesaid amount, if already recovered, within one month from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order before the Executive Engineer, failing which he shall expose himself to the charge of contempt of the order of this Court.
4. This writ petition is, accordingly, allowed. (V.N. Sinha, J.) Rajesh/- U