High CourtsSingle Bench(2010) 11 SHI CK 0160

Sh. S.K. Malhotra vs H.P. State Electricity Board and Another

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 2 November 2010

HON’BLE JUDGES
Surinder Singh, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
C.W.P. (T) No. 5575 of 2008

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 350 words

Surinder Singh, J.—Petitioner filed the Original Application in the Erstwhile Tribunal seeking following reliefs:

(i) To quash and set aside the impugned order dated 17.7.1995 at Annexure PA and re-fix the pay of the applicant in the manner indicated here in below:

(a) Selection Grade as Assistant Engineer be allowed w.e.f. 11.2.1980;

(b) Annual Increment as Selection Grade Assistant Engineer be granted w.e.f. 1.2.1981 and

(c) Further, re-fix the applicant as Assistant Executive Engineer w.e.f. 1.2.1981 after taking into consideration his annual increment as Assistant Engineer;

(ii) To direct the respondents to refund to the applicant a sum of Rs. 18,496/- with compound interest @ 12% per annum on the amount, arbitrarily and illegally deducted from the salary of the applicant on the basis of void-abinitio and no-est impugned order at Annexure PA dated 17.7.1995 while allowing the attendant service benefits;

2.

After the abolition of the Tribunal, this Original Application was transferred to this Court and registered as CWP(T).

3.

Reply in the petition stands filed.

4.

Heard and gone through the record.

5.

Petitioner, at the time of filing the Original Application was working as Director Planning in the respondent-Board and officiated as Assistant Executive Engineer(AEE) vide order dated 30.12.1980 and fixed in a particular pay scale. Vide office order dated 17.7.1995(Annexure PA) in continuation to the earlier office order dated 22.10.1993 and in compliance of the order dated 5.12.1996 read with office order No. 100, of the Secretary of the respondent-Board, pay of the petitioner was re-fixed w.e.f. 22.1.1981 which necessitated the recovery of over payment to the tune of Rs. 13252/- pursuant to which the recovery was partly effected.

6.

Now the petitioner stands retired and learned Counsel foregoes the other reliefs, except that of arbitrary order of recovery being effected from him. In fact, the impugned order was passed without notice to the petitioner and, that too, after 15 years right from the date, he was promoted. The impugned order Annexure PA is against the principles of natural justice, therefore, it is quashed and set aside. The consequences shall follow. The matter stands disposed of.