JUDGMENT :

AMRITA SINHA, J.

1. The writ petition is at the instance of the official respondents in the original application filed by an employee inter alia, seeking for quashing the impugned orders dated 14^th January, 2008, 05^th December, 2014 and all consequential orders passed pursuant thereto. Prayer in the original application was also made for awarding first financial upgradation under ACP Scheme with effect from 30^th October, 2004 and MACP with effect from 29^th October, 2012 when he completed 12 years and 20 years respectively in the appropriate scale of pay. Arrears and interest were also sought for.

2. The learned Tribunal vide impugned order dated 11th January, 2024 allowed the prayer of the employee and set aside and quashed the orders dated 04th January, 2008 and 05th December, 2014 and consequently directed the authority to pay the arrears with effect from 30^th October, 2004 to the date of actual payment within forty- five days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order failing which interest at the rate as applicable to GPF deposits will be payable to the employee.

3. According to the petitioners, revision of pay of the employee was necessitated on detection of an error in his pay fixation. The authority contends that certain financial benefit, not available to the employee, was inadvertently granted to him. On detection of the error, the said benefit had to be withdrawn for which the revision was called for.

4. It has been argued that the employee does not have any right to receive payment which was made to him by mistake and the authority made the necessary amendments by revising the pay of the employee upon detection of the same.

5. Learned senior counsel representing the petitioners has painstakingly placed before the Court the various documents in support of the submission that certain financial benefit which was given to the employee was not meant for him and, as such, it was proper for the authority to rectify the mistake and pay the employee his rightful due.

6. Prayer has been made to set aside the impugned order of the Tribunal and consequently direct the authority to make payment in accordance with the revised pay as calculated by the employer.

7. Learned advocate representing the employee strongly opposes the prayer of the petitioners. It has been submitted that the writ petition is liable to be dismissed with costs on the ground of suppression of material facts.

8. It has been submitted that a miscellaneous application seeking extension of time for making payment has been filed by the petitioners before the learned Tribunal in the month of July, 2024 which was considered by the learned Tribunal and an order has been passed on 19^th November, 2024 granting four weeks’ time for implementing the direction passed in the order dated 11^th January, 2024.

9. It has been submitted that the instant writ petition has been filed on 11^th September, 2024 completely suppressing the fact of filing the miscellaneous application seeking extension of time to comply the Tribunal’s order. The petitioners deliberately suppressed the fact of filing the miscellaneous application solely to mislead this Hon’ble Court.

10. It has been argued that the instant writ petition has been filed by four petitioners and the same has been affirmed by the petitioner no. 4 being the Administrative Officer of the Institute where the employee served. The petitioner no. 4 has not been authorized by the petitioner nos. 1 to 3 to file the instant writ petition. The Union of India being the respondent no.1 in the original application has been impleaded as proforma respondent in the writ petition.

11. It has been submitted that the communication dated 18^th July, 2006 revising the pay was communicated to the employee only in the month of September, 2015. The authority merely passed order in the official file but never cared to communicate the same to the employee despite an order to that effect.

12. It has been pleaded that the employee retired