Shri Govind Ram vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 10414 HP

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

                                            CWPOA No. 5078 of 2020
                                            Decided on : 27.07.2023




                                                               .
     Shri Govind Ram                                       ....Petitioner.





                 Versus





     State of Himachal Pradesh and others                  ...Respondents.
     Coram

     The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao, Chief Justice.





     The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.
     Whether approved for reporting?
     For the petitioner :  M/s A.K. Gupta and Babita Kumari,
                    r      Advocates.

     For the respondents:M/s Navlesh Verma, Rakesh Dhaulta and
                         Pranay Pratap Singh, Additional Advocate
                         Generals and M/s Gautam Sood, Arsh Rattan


                         and Sidharth Jalta, Deputy Advocate
                         Generals for respondents/State.
     M.S. Ramachandra Rao, Chief Justice (Oral)

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as

learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondents.

2. In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the

order dt. 01.08.2018 (Annexure A-3), proposing to recover from

the petitioner a sum of ₹2,89,936/- from September, 2018.

3. The petitioner was working as a Welder and later

promoted as Welder Grade-1 w.e.f. 01.01.2010 and in the revised

grade w.e.f. 01.01.2012. His pay was fixed vide order dt.

19.01.2016 (Annexure A-1).

.

4. Thereafter, without giving any opportunity to the

petitioner, said order was withdrawn vide Annexure A-2, dt.

30.05.2018 and his pay was reduced. Subsequently, the impugned

order was passed proposing to recover an amount of ₹2,89,936/-

from the petitioner @ ₹10,000/- per month from September,

2018. r

5. The petitioner contends that no reason is assigned

why the benefit given on 19.01.2016 was withdrawn on

30.05.2018;that no notice was issued before said withdrawal; and

in any event, in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court

in State of Punjab and others Versus Rafiq Masih (White

Washer) and others1, since the petitioner has not made any

misrepresentation or committed any fraud for securing the said

benefit, and since the petitioner belongs to Class-III service, said

recovery is impermissible.

6. This legal position is not disputed by learned Deputy

Advocate General appearing for the respondents. Accordingly,

(2015) 4 SCC 334

this writ petition is allowed and order dt. 01.08.2018 (Annexure

A-3) passed by the respondents is set aside.

.

7. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also

stand disposed of accordingly.

                                            (M.S. Ramachandra Rao)
                                                 Chief Justice





                                            (Ajay Mohan Goel)
    July 27, 2023                                 Judge
         (narender)