JUDGMENT : 

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J.

CM-4780-CWP-2026

1. This application has been filed under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking preponement of date of hearing from 21.07.2026 to some earlier date, on the ground that case of the applicant- petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment dated 12.02.2026 (Annexure P- 29) rendered by this Court in CWP-11499-2022 titled as Jarnail Singh Vs. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and others along with one another writ petition i.e. CWP-12240-2022.

2. Notice of the application to non-applicants/respondents.

3. Mr. M.S. Longia, Advocate, who is present in the Court, accepts notice on behalf of the non-applicants/respondents. He is not in a position to distinguish the case of the applicant-petitioner from that of the petitioner(s) in Jarnail Singh’s case (supra).

4. In view of the above, present application is allowed and date of hearing is preponed from 21.07.2026 to today. The main petition is taken up for final disposal today itself.

CWP-16262-2024

5. Instant writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari seeking quashing of impugned pay fixation (Annexure P-12), vide which pay of the petitioner was refixed and reduced for the period from 01.08.2003 to August, 2009 and an amount of Rs.56,348/- was recovered from the arrears payable to him and the order dated 29.09.2022 (Annexure P-18) and gratuity payment order dated 12.03.2024 (Annexure P-21), whereby also, his pay was refixed and reduced from June, 2000 to June, 2021 and amount of Rs.2,68,770/- was ordered to be recovered from the gratuity. Further, it is prayed to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to refix the pay of the petitioner after granting/restoring promotional increments already granted as Junior Engineer (Annexure P-8) and also to grant promotional increment as AAE (Annexure P-14). It is also prayed to direct the respondents to refund the total recovered amount of Rs.3,25,118/- along with interest @12% per annum in view of the judgment passed by the Full Bench of this Court in A.S. Randhawa Supg. Engineer (Retd.) Vs. State of Punjab, 1998 (1) SCT 34.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner initially joined erstwhile Punjab State Electricity Board on 10.08.1987 and retired on 31.10.2023. When the case of the petitioner was sent for grant of pension, his pay was wrongly fixed and recovery was ordered vide impugned memo dated 29.09.2022 (Annexure P-18). Thereafter, an amount of Rs.2,68,770/- was recovered from gratuity of the petitioner. Further, case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgments rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Punjab Vs. Rafiq Masih, 2015(1) SCT 195 and this Court in Jarnail Singh’s case (supra). It is further contended that the respondents imposed the recovery upon the petitioner on the basis of some audit objection. As such, any order having civil consequences without issuance of any show cause notice is not sustainable in the eyes of law. Furthermore, this Court has considered the issue regarding recovery based upon some audit objection and has categorically held that in the absence of any chargesheet or disciplinary proceedings, no recovery can be imposed upon an employee post-retirement. As such, the petitioner is entitled to the financial benefits in terms of the judgment passed by this Court in Jarnail Singh’s case (supra) on account of working on higher post.

7. Learned counsel for the respondents-Corporation is not in a position to controvert the fact that case of the petitioner is at par and identical to Jarnail Singh’s case (supra). However, he submits that the petitioner challenged the impugned order fixing his pay (Annexure P-12) passed on 10.08.2009, by way of filing a writ petition in the year 2024. The said order was passed after due compliance of the principles of natural justice. The delay in app