JUDGMENT :

Harsimran Singh Sethi J. (Oral)

1. By this common order, eight writ petitions, the details of which have been given in the heading, are being decided as all these petitions involve the same question of law on similar facts.

2. In the present bunch of petitions, the grievance of the petitioners is that their pay has been revised by the respondents and after the revision, the recovery has been ordered and that too in a selective manner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the pay of the petitioners was fixed by the respondents as per the Notification issued in the year 2011 and the petitioners continued to receive the said re-fixed salary, which was fixed by the respondents on their own without there being any input by the petitioners and now, the said pay is again being re-fixed to the detriment of the petitioners and the recovery of the excess payment has also been ordered to be done starting from 01.01.2018, which action on the part of the respondents is arbitrary and illegal.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no recovery of excess payment can be done from a Class-Ill or a Class-IV employee, especially when there is no misrepresentation on the part of the employee concerned qua the fixation of their salary, which has now been re-fixed by the respondents.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the re-fixation of the salary of the petitioners has been done on the basis of the Instructions dated 01.01.2018 (Annexure R-2) issued by the Government of Punjab and keeping in view the said Instructions, till the date of the Instructions issued by the Government of Punjab, no recovery is to be done but as, the Instructions were issued by the State of Punjab on 01.01.2018, the recovery is being done starting from 01.01.2018 though, it is a conceded fact that the order re-fixing their salary was passed starting from the year 2019 onwards.

6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance.

7. The question which arises for determination in the present bunch of petitions is whether, any amount paid in excess to an employee, who is working on a Class-Ill or a Class-IV post, can be recovered in case there is no fraud played by the said employee so as to get the amount beyond his/her entitlement.

8. The said question of law has been decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) etc., 2015(1) S.C.T., 195. The relevant paragraph of the said judgment is as under:-

'12. It is not possible to postulate all situations of hardship, which would govern employees on the issue of recovery, where payments have mistakenly been made by the employer, in excess of their entitlement. Be that as it may, based on the decisions referred to herein above, we may, as a ready reference, summarise the following few situations, wherein recoveries by the employers, would be impermissible in law:-

(i) Recovery from employees belonging to Class-Ill and Class-IV service (or Group 'C and Group 'D' service).

(ii) Recovery from retired employees, or employees who are due to retire within one year, of the order of recovery.

(iii) Recovery from employees, when the excess payment has been made for a period in excess of five years, before the order of recovery is issued.

(iv) Recovery in cases where an employee has wrongfully been required to discharge duties of a higher post, and has been paid accordingly, even though he should have rightfully been required to work against an inferior post.

(v) In any other case, where the Court arrives at the conclusion, that recovery if made from the employee, would be iniquitous or harsh or arbitrary to such an extent, as would far outweigh the equitable balance of the employer's right to recover. '

9. A bare perusal of the above reproduction shows that no recovery of an excess amount paid can be done from a Class-Ill and Class-IV employee. It is a conceded position that in the presen