Ram Pravesh Singh, Son of Late Babu Ram Singh vs The State of Bihar

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.

The petitioners have moved the Court for quashing of order contained in Letter No. 1931 dated 24.06.2015, passed by the respondent no. 3, by which the promotion given to them in Graduate trained scale has been cancelled and order has been made for recovery.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that in the year 2011, they were granted promotion on the basis of being Matric trained and having completed 24 years of service and thereafter in the year 2013, on the basis of them being Graduate trained, further financial benefits was granted to them. Learned counsel submitted that the said two increments in their emoluments were granted after the duly constituted Committee recommended their case and which was accepted by the Competent Authority. Learned counsel submitted that payment was also made and only because of objection raised by the Accountant General, the same has been withdrawn and recovery ordered. Learned counsel relied upon decisions of the Division Benches of this Court in the case of State of Bihar v. Ram Sharan Prasad Singh reported as 2007(Supp.) PLJR 223 as well as State of Bihar vs. Rajendra Prasad Shrivastava reported as 2016 (3) PLJR 509, for the proposition that if without any laches or misrepresentation on the part of the petitioners, monetary benefits have accrued and payment made, the same cannot be recovered.

Learned counsel for the State submitted that in view of the objection raised by the Accountant General, they have also found that the objection was correct and the second Graduate trained benefit was wrongly granted to the petitioners.

Having considered the rival contentions, this Court finds that the order needs interference partly. The benefit given to the petitioners on account of a duly constituted Committee having approved such payment and benefits also derived by them and payment made, there cannot be any recovery as there was no fault, laches or misrepresentation on their part. That is one aspect of the

matter. The other aspect of the matter is that if a bona fide mistake has been committed by the Authorities, they are always at liberty to correct the same but, it can only be done prospectively.

For the reasons aforesaid, the authorities directing for recovery of the amount already paid to the petitioners is set aside.

However, the State shall be at liberty to notionally rectify their salary, as per their entitlement, prospectively, either re-fixing their pensionary benefits or if they are in service, for payment to them henceforth after re-fixing their salary/emoluments.

The writ petition stands disposed off in the aforementioned terms.