Heard Dr. R.S. Pande, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Gaurav Mehrotra, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The petitioner has assailed the Office Memo dated 20.11.2009 issued by the Deputy Registrar (Accounts) communicating the decision of Hon'ble the Chief Justice dated 02.11.2004 to recover a total sum of Rs.34,955/- paid to the petitioner in excess to his entitlement on the post of Assistant Registrar as well as the Deputy Registrar. The period for payment in excess has been enumerated as w.e.f. 14.08.2003 to January, 2004 and February, 2004 to September, 2004.

3. The petitioner while working on the post of Deputy Registrar retired from service on 28.02.2005. The impugned order was issued to the petitioner on 20.11.2009 i.e. after about four and a half years from the date of his retirement.

4. In view of the aforesaid facts, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that such a case has been dealt with by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab and others v. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and others; (2015) 4 SCC 334 . The Hon'ble Supreme Court had discussed each and every aspect on the point of recovery of the amount paid in exc