O R D E R

The present Original Application has been filed by the applicant under Section-19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:-

i. Directing the non-applicants to fix the pensionary and post-retirement benefits of the Applicants on the basis of their last pay drawn.

ii. Directing the non-applicants to pay all the dues, arrears and Gratuity alongwith other post-retirement benefits to the Applicants.

Pass any such order or orders which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit.”

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants at length and perused the material available on record.

3. The controversy involved in the present Original Application is no longer res integra. The issues raised herein stand completely settled by a couple of judgments, one rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and another by the Hon’ble High Court in the context of SRO 149 and SRO 59, respectively.

4. The Hon’ble High Court, in its recent pronouncement dated 06.03.2026 in WPI No. 936/2025 along with connected matters, titled UT of J&K & Ors. vs. Maqbool Sheikh & Ors., while adjudicating upon the issue related to benefits granted under SRO 59, has categorically held as under:

“42. Accordingly, all these writ petitions are disposed of by modifying the impugned order(s) to the extent that the petitioners shall not affect any recovery of the excess amount already paid to the respondents and, if any such amount has been recovered, the same shall be refunded to them within the period prescribed by the learned Tribunal. However, the petitioners shall be at liberty to re-fix the pay/pension of the respondents by excluding the benefit wrongly granted to them.”

A plain reading of the aforesaid extract leaves no manner of doubt that the Hon’ble High Court has unequivocally prohibited the recovery of any excess payment already disbursed to the employees. It has further been mandated that any recovery, if already effected, must be refunded within the stipulated timeframe. At the same time, a liberty has been reserved in favour of the respondents to undertake re-fixation of pay/pension by excluding only such benefit as may have been erroneously granted.

5. Further, it is also apposite to refer to the judgment dated 08.05.2017 rendered by the Hon’ble High Court in Provincial Power Employees Union of India & Ors. vs. State of J&K & Ors. (SWP No. 809/2021 along with connected matters), wherein the Court, after an elaborate consideration of the matter relating to SRO 149, held:

“18. It is also pertinent to note that in pursuance of order dated 02.12.2008 passed in SWP No. 874 of 2006, the respondents have filed an affidavit before this Court, in which it is stated that after enactment of the recruitment rules, benefit to 233 employees has been granted. Admittedly, benefit of SRO 149 of 1973 as well as subsequent pay revisions has been extended to the employees of Police Department as well as Geology and Mining Department. Admittedly, the benefit of the aforesaid SRO granted to employees of the said department has been upheld by the Division Benches of this Court in Letters Patent Appeals, namely, LPASW No. 224/2012 and LPASW No. 370/2002. Thus, the respondents are estopped from their conduct from taking a different stand now. 19. It is also pertinent to mention here that the learned Single Judge of this Court in bunch of writ petitions being lead case namely WP No. 894/1990 held the employees to be entitled to the benefit of SRO 149 of 1973. Against the aforesaid order, Letters Patent Appeal was filed by the State which was disposed of with the liberty to submit representation to the State Government. However, it is pertinent to note that Division Bench made it clear that it has not expressed any opinion about the findings of the learned Single on the questions of law. 20. Learned Government Advocate has placed reliance on decision in the case of Kartar Nath rendered in LPASW No. 379 of 1999 decided on 19.12.2003 in support of the contention tha