ORDER :

(Ananda Sen, J.)

1. This intra-Court appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent is filed by the State of Jharkhand, challenging the order/judgment dated 14.6.2021 passed in W.P.(S) No. 4151 of 2017, whereby, the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition, setting aside order dated 24.3.2017 passed by the Under Secretary, Department of Water Resources, Jharkhand, whereby, the Accountant General (A&E) had been instructed to deduct four increments from the salary of the petitioner, admissible w.e.f. 1.7.2012 and on the basis of the same, the pension was directed to be revised and also the salary paid in excess was directed to be deducted form the pension of the writ petitioner to the extent of Rs.2,34,799/-.

2. The original writ-petitioner was appointed as a Junior Engineer on 2.2.1979 in the State of Bihar and retired from the post of Assistant Engineer on 31.1.2006. The last pay drawn by him was Rs.31,030/-in the grade pay of Rs.7600/-and basic salary of Rs.38,360/-plus other admissible allowances. The benefits of the first time bound promotion was extended to the writ petitioner with effect from 27.8.1990 and his pay scale was accordingly revised. On 2.4.2007, the Water Resources Department issued an order under which, the first ACP was allowed to the writ petitioner and his pay scale was again revised. The 2nd ACP was granted to him w.e.f. 2.2.2003 and the benefit of MACP was also granted to him w.e.f. 2.2.2009. Subsequently, the writ petitioner was promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer vide letter No. 2005 dated 20.4.2011. Thereafter, he superannuated on 31.1.2016.

3. The writ petitioner received all benefits of promotion and ACP, MACP, during his service tenure but after superannuation, vide Memo No. 1533 dated 24.3.2017, it was instructed to deduct an amount of Rs.2,34,799/-which has been drawn by the writ petitioner due to wrong fixation of pay w.e.f. 1.7.2012, as the petitioner has not passed a departmental examination. The aforesaid order was challenged before the learned Single Judge in WPS No. 4151 of 2017. The learned Single Judge after considering the submissions of the parties and considering the judgments in the case of Laxman Prasad Gupta Vs. State of Jharkhand, reported in 2007(4) JLJR 459 and Smt. Normi Topno Vs. State of Jharkhand, reported in 2007 (4) JLJR 466 and State of Punjab & Rs. Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer), reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334, allowed the writ petition vide order dated 14.6.2021 quashing the order of recovery and directed that the pension should be paid on the last pay scale drawn by the writ petitioner at the time of retirement. Challenging the said order, this appeal has been filed.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant-State and the respondent and have perused the writ petition and the memo of appeal along with documents, filed therein.

5. Learned counsel for the State/appellant submits that the pay scale of the writ petitioner was wrongly fixed in the year 2012 and when the matter was placed before the Accountant General (A&E), Jharkhand for fixation of pension, the Accountant General directed to recover the amount of Rs.2,34,799/-from the pension of the petitioner. Counsel for the State further submits that the petitioner has not passed one departmental examination which was necessary, thus the order of recovery was passed. On query, counsel for the State admits that there is no misrepresentation or fraud committed by the writ petitioner.

6. Learned senior counsel for the writ-petitioner (respondent herein) submits that the order passed by appellant-State to recover an amount of Rs.2,34,799.00 is bad, as the same suffers from violation of principle of natural justice. He further submits that before passing the order of recovery, the writ petitioner was neither noticed nor a show cause was called for, from him. So far as passing of departmental examination is concerned, he also submits that the writ petitioner had cleared all the examinations, but