2.2 A(cid:4)er being ini(cid:12)ally appointed as Lecturer in Mechanical (Assistant Professor), pe(cid:12)(cid:12)oner was promoted as Senior Lecturer in April, 2003 and then designated as Associate Professor in April, 2011 with the respondent-University. While working as Senior Lecturer, pe(cid:12)(cid:12)oner was granted study leave as per Rule 6.14 and 12.12 of the College By-Laws ini(cid:12)ally for a period of 02 years from 31.08.2010 to 30.08.2012, which was extendable up to 03 years on the recommenda(cid:12)ons of PEC University of Technology, Chandigarh for doing Ph.D. with various condi(cid:12)ons specified therein. One of the condi(cid:12)ons was that pe(cid:12)(cid:12)oner will have to serve the college a(cid:4)er his return from leave for a period of 05 years. A bond to that effect was also taken from the pe(cid:12)(cid:12)oner.

2.3 Pe(cid:12)(cid:12)oner has given various reasons due to which he could not complete the Ph.D. despite the fact that extension of study leave was granted to him up to 30.08.2013. On comple(cid:12)on of the study leave period, the PEC University of Technology relieved the pe(cid:12)(cid:12)oner as Research Scholar on 29.08.2013 and he re-joined the respondent-Ins(cid:12)tute on comple(cid:12)on of study leave on 30.08.2013. Ever since then, he has been performing his du(cid:12)es.

2.4 Respondent No.3 -the Deputy Director, Technical Educa(cid:12)on and Industrial Training issued memo dated 24.01.2023 (Annexure P-10) to ini(cid:12)ate disciplinary proceedings against the pe(cid:12)(cid:12)oner, as he remained unsuccessful in comple(cid:12)ng Ph.D. during the study leave. On the basis of this memo, mee(cid:12)ng of Board of Governors took place on 17.02.2023 and le>er dated 24.02.2023 (Annexure P-11) was issued, whereby Finance Officer of the respondent-University has been directed to effect the recoveries from the pending and future salaries of the pe(cid:12)(cid:12)oner. Later on, another le>er dated 07.03.2013 (Annexure P-12) was issued by respondent No.4 for recovery of ₹42,61,184/- from the pending and future salary of the pe(cid:12)(cid:12)oner on account of the benefits of the study leave granted to him during three years period of study leave.

2.5 Alleging the aforesaid ac(cid:12)on of the respondents to be wrong, illegal, arbitrary, uncons(cid:12)tu(cid:12)onal and viola(cid:12)ve of the principles of the natural jus(cid:12)ce, pe(cid:12)(cid:12)oner has filed this pe(cid:12)(cid:12)on.

3 It is contended by learned counsel for the pe(cid:12)(cid:12)oner that study leave period of the pe(cid:12)(cid:12)oner was completed on 30.08.2013 and that impugned order for effec(cid:12)ng the recovery has been passed on 24.01.2023 vide Annexure P-10, i.e. a(cid:4)er a period of more than 09 years. Learned counsel has drawn a>en(cid:12)on towards the College By-Laws (Annexure P-1), under which the service of the pe(cid:12)(cid:12)oner is governed, so as to contend that none of the provisions provide for recovery of benefits during study leave, in case an employee fails to complete the Ph.D. S(cid:12)ll further, it is contended that recovery sought to be effected by way of the impugned orders is against the legal posi(cid:12)on explained by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in “State of Punjab and others etc. v. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) etc.”, 2015(4) SCC 334.

4. On the other hand, respondents have jus(cid:12)fied their ac(cid:12)on. It is submi>ed that respondent No.4-University is dependent upon grant-in-aid for salary of the staff given by the Government of Punjab; that complaints were received against the officials of respondent No.4 for crea(cid:12)ng significant financial loss to the University and as it came to light that University had granted benefits against rules, so decision was taken to effect the recoveries. Respondent No.4 also submits that a(cid:4)er passing of the order dated 07.03.2023 (Annexure P-12), pe(cid:12)(cid:12)oner had made a representa(cid:12)on dated 28.03.2023 (Annexure R-1) p