1. Heard learned advocates for the parties.

2. The writ petitioner was successful before the learned First Court in having an order of recovery of certain sums received by him in course of employment invalidated, but has approached us seeking negation of certain proposition of law expressed in the judgment under appeal.

3. The writ petitioner was appointed as a clerk in the Leprosy Subsidiary Centre, Chakulia, East Singhbhum and subsequently was promoted to the post of Non-Medical Assistant at the same centre. He has superannuated on 31.1.2007. In course of his employment, he had been given the benefit of Assured Career Progression (A.C.P.) Scheme which lifted his pay scale from Rs. 5,000-8,000/- to Rs. 5,500-9,000/-. After his superannuation, the case of the authorities is that they found that he was not entitled to such enhanced pay scale in the aforesaid scheme and hence, issued an order for recovery, upon cancelling the order of A.C.P. The complaint of the writ petitioner before the learned First Court was that on merit as well on procedural aspect, such cancellation and recovery direction could not be issued. On merit, the writ petitioner’s stand was that he was entitled