Withdrawal of vested employee benefits requires prior notice and cannot be done retroactively without due process.

Order :

ANAND SHARMA, J.

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the order dated 10.06.2009 passed by Superintendent of Police, Headquarter Jaipur City whereby, the benefits of annual grade increment/selection grade earlier granted to the petitioner has been modified in the manner detrimental to the interest of the petitioner. He has also challenged the order dated 23.06.2009, whereby pay fixation of the petitioner has been done pursuant to order dated 10.06.2009. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed to the post of ‘General Constable’ on 14.09.1976 and at the relevant time, there was no separate cadre for Driver in M.T. branch. Learned counsel for the petitioner was discharging duties of the Driver. However, in the year 1989, a separate post of Constable (Driver) was created with the arrangement that the Constable, who was earlier working as Driver shall continue to work and can be adjusted against the sanctioned post of ‘Constable (Driver)’.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that accordingly, the monetary benefits, including annual grade increment/selection grade were granted to the petitioner vide order dated 03.06.1999 in the pay scale of Rs. 1400-1600/-, was further revised in the pay scale of Rs.5500-9000. Thereafter, benefit of third selection grade on completion of 27 years of service was also given to the petitioner vide order dated 16.08.2004. However, quite abruptly, without giving any opportunity of hearing or without issuing any notice whatsoever, order dated 10.06.2009 was issued by the respondents whereby, the benefits of annual grade increment/selection grade earlier granted to the petitioner were modified and revised at the lower stage, and recovery of the excess amount earlier paid pursuant to alleged erroneous fixation was directed to be effected. The aforesaid order dated 10.06.2009 was followed by another order dated 23.06.2009, whereby pay fixation of the petitioner has been done in accordance with order dated 10.06.2009.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the annual grade increment and benefit of selection grade were granted by the respondents to the petitioner in accordance with their own rules and regulations/circulars, and at no point of time, the petitioner had ever misrepresented or committed fraud in getting such benefits. Once, these benefits were granted to the petitioner and he drew salary accordingly, after around 10 to 15 years, such benefits cannot be withdrawn that too without granting any opportunity of hearing whatsoever.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that even in the light of judgment of State of Punjab & Ors. Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) & Ors. reported in 2015 (4) SCC 334 Supreme Court and Jagdish Prasad Singh Vs State of Bihar & Ors. reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1909 , recovery of excess amount cannot be made from the petitioner.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents opposed the writ petition and submits that earlier, confusion arose due to different pay scales admissible to Constable (General) and Constable (Driver) and higher pay scale was erroneously allowed to the petitioner, which is otherwise not admissible to him. Hence, when such mistake was traced by the authorities, in order to grant the correct pay scale and benefits of annual grade increment/selection grade, order dated 10.06.2009 has been passed by the respondents.

6. Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that, any person holding post with the Government is under an obligation not to draw higher salary than the salary otherwise admissible to him under the Rules.