Dr.(Miss) Tripat Sharma vs Kurukshetra University Etc
2024 Latest Caselaw 17463 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Dr.(Miss) Tripat Sharma vs Kurukshetra University Etc on 19 September, 2024

MANINDER

2024.09.26 10:10

I attest to the accurac
authenticity of this
order/judgment.

CWP-4179-2000 (O&M) 1

2024. PRHC 325244

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

Sr. No.203 CWP-4179-2000 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 19.09.2024

Dr. Tripat Sharma .... Petitioner
Versus

The Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra and another ... Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHTYA

Present: Ms. Parbeen Dharwal, Advocate for
Mr. Gunjan Mehta, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Nilesh Kant Goyal, Advocate for

Mr. A.S. Virk, Advocate for the respondents.
3 2k 3

TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (ORAL)

The petition has been filed seeking a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 02.03.2000, Annexure P/9-A, whereby the University has ordered recovery of excess payment made to the petitioner on account of

grant of senior scale pay with effect from 01.01.1986, instead of 12.07.1988.

2. The only contention raised by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that she is aggrieved against the impugned order to the extent recovery of excess payment made to her has been ordered on

account of grant of senior scale pay with effect from 01.01.1986.

3. The petitioner, who was working as Lecturer in History in the Directorate of Correspondence Courses of the University, was granted senior scale pay with effect from 01.01.1986, vide office order dated 21.04.1990, Annexure P/1-B. Later, the date of senior scale of pay was revised to 12.07.1988, vide impugned order dated 02.03.2000, and recovery of excess

'athount paid to her from 01.01.1986 to 12.07.1988 was ordered. The

CWP-4179-2000 (O&M) 2

2024. PRHC 325244

University granted senior scale pay to the petitioner on its own without there being any misrepresentation on her behalf. Besides, during pendency of the petition, she has superannuated from service as well. As per law laid down by the Supreme Court in State of Punjab and others v. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and others, 2015(4) SCC 334, recovery of excess payment to an employee cannot be effected after retirement.

4. Learned counsel for the University is not in a position to dispute the facts aforestated.

5. In view thereof, the petition stands disposed of without interfering with the impugned order, at the same time, restraining the

University from effecting any recovery from the petitioner in terms thereof.

(TRIBHUVAN DAHTYA) JUDGE 19.09.2024 Maninder Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No

Whether reportable : Yes/No