IMPORTANT POINT
The recovery of excess amount and the implementation of higher pay scale benefits must be in accordance with the provisions of the circular dated 31.3.1995, and no recovery can be made for the period during which the employee worked on a higher post and earned a salary for the higher post.

JUDGMENT :

1. The petitioner has preferred present petition under Articles 14, 21 19 and 226 of the Constitution of India challenging orders dated 13.4.2012 and 18.6.2010 passed by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 with below mentioned prayer/s:-

"7(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to call for the record and proceedings of the Revision Application No. 414 of 2011 from the office of the Respondent No1, and after perusal of the same, be pleased to quash and set aside the orders dated 13.04.2012 and 18.06.2010 passed by the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 herein, and further be pleased:-

[i] to command the Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to comply with the orders 03.06.2009 and 21.07.2008 passed by the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and;

[ii] to repay to the petitioner the amount of Rs. 1,13,193/- illegally deducted by them, along with 18% interest per annum from 15.02.2006 till the date of its actual realisation; and

[iii] to pay the arrears of third higher pay scale w.e.f. 01.03.2000, being on completion of 27 years in the same cadre without any opportunity of promotion or increase of salary/pay;

(B) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the present Writ Petition, Your Honour may be pleased to direct the Respondent No.3 and 4 to invest the amount of Rs. 1,13,193/- with 18% interest as calculated from 15.02.2006 in a fixed deposit of a nationalized bank for such period as the Hon'ble Court deems fit;

(C) Your Honour may be pleased to pass such other and further reliefs as the nature and circumstances of the case may require."

2. The brief facts giving rise to present petition are that the petitioner was initially working as Clerk with the erstwhile Devgadhbaria Agricultural Produce Market Committee since 01.07.1973, and on bifurcation of the said Market Committee, the petitioner herein was placed under the office of the Respondent No. 3 and 4 herein, i.e. Limkheda Agricultural Produce Market Committee till the age of superannuation i.e. 31.5.2010.

2.1 On 17.8.1992, a circular was issued by the Respondent No.1 extending benefit of the higher pay scale to the employees of the Agricultural Produce Market Committee [herein after referred to as "the APMC" for the sack of brevity and convenience).

2.2 On the basis of the circular dated 17.8.1992, the Respondent No.4 issued an order on 28.10.1993 giving the benefit of the higher pay scale to the petitioner and the pay scale was fixed at Rs.1380/- with effect from 01.03.1982. Even at the end of the service of 18 years in the same cadre, as there was no promotional avenue, the petitioner was placed into the pay scale of Rs.1480/- with effect from 1.3.1991.

2.3 On 31.3.1995, the aforesaid circular dated 17.8.1992 was amended and the petitioner herein was given benefit of the second higher pay scale on completing service of 18 years.

2.4 Thereafter in April 2005, on account of the promotional avenue having been available, the petitioner herein was offered promotional post of Inspector and the petitioner has refused the said promotion.

2.5 Then vide order dated 15.02.2006, the Respondent No. 3 informed the petitioner that under the directions of the Deputy Director and District Registrar of Cooperative Societies, the pay scale of the petitioner herein was required to be revised and the Second Higher Pay Scale was to be recovered from the petitioner. The said Authority also reduced salary of the petitioner from Rs.11,308/- in the pay scale of Rs.5000-8000 to a meagre sum of Rs.7000/- per month w.e.f. September, 2005, under the garb of the refusal of the petitioner to accept the promotion. However, after moving before the this Court by way of Special Civil Application No. 3210 of 2007 on 24.12.2007, the learned Director, Agricultural Produce & Rural Economy was directed to decide the grievance of the petitioner afresh. Vide an order dated 21.7.2008, the Respondent No.2 was quashed and set aside the order dated 15.2.2006 and thus the recovery aspect has been deleted.

2.6 Against order dated 21.07.2008, Revision Application came to