IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

215 Date of Decision : 13.05.2026 Mander Singh …..Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present : Mr. Ritesh Aggarwal, Advocate with Mr. Chankirat Singh Bakshi, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Surya Kumar, A.A.G., Punjab.

****

NAMIT KUMAR, J. (ORAL)

1. The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 22.07.2020 (Annexure P-7), passed by respondent No.4, whereby the pay of the petitioner has been reduced with retrospective effect and an amount of Rs.4,51,441/- has been ordered to be recovered, out of which Rs.35,000/- per month was ordered to be recovered from the pay of June, July, August and September 2020 and the remaining amount has been ordered to be recovered from the Leave Encashment of the petitioner, as the petitioner was due to retire on 30.09.2020. Further, seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents not only to restore the pay of the petitioner but also to refund the amount already recovered from him and further to refix the pay of the petitioner as per rules and also pay the arrears of re-fixed pay along with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of accrual till actual realization.

2. Brief facts of the case, as have been pleaded in the petition, are that the petitioner joined the service with the respondent-department in the Master Cadre on 31.12.1996 as Punjabi Master. Since the petitioner worked as Supervisor under the Adult Education Scheme of Punjab Government (Implemented under the Rural Functional Literary Programme) for the period from 15.02.1988 to 30.06.1991, therefore, he along with some other employees filed CWP No.2952 of 2001 tiled as ‘Sewa Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and others’ before this Court for issuance of directions to the respondents-State to count their previous services rendered as Supervisor under the Adult Education Scheme for the purpose of fixation of pay and grant of other benefits. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court, vide order dated 25.02.2001, with a direction to respondent No.2 therein to consider the representation/notice of demand served by the petitioners therein and decide the same by passing a speaking order in accordance with law within a period of four months. Pursuant to the said order, respondent No.2-Director Public Instruction (S.E.), Punjab, vide order dated 13.07.2001 (Annexure P-2), considered the claim of the petitioner and other employees and ordered grant of the benefit of their previous service for fixation of pay only. Consequently, the pay of the petitioner was re-fixed. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted as Lecturer in English on 16.05.2012. Although, the petitioner was due to retire on attaining the age of superannuation on 30.09.2019, however, he was granted one year extension in service as per policy of the Punjab Government till 30.09.2020. Before his retirement, the petitioner had requested respondent No.4 to prepare his pension case in time and send the same to the Accountant General (A&E) Punjab, Chandigarh for sanction of his pensionary benefits. However, respondent No.4, instead of preparing the pension case of the petitioner, issued a notice dated 30.06.2020 (Annexure P-3) to the petitioner demanding recovery of Rs.4,51,441/- allegedly on account of excess payment of pay. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted his reply to the said notice on 04.07.2020 (Annexure P-4) and requested that his pay should be fixed as per rules and his pension case may be sent, but instead of fixing the pay of the petitioner as per rules, respondent No.4, vide his order dated 18.07.2020, withdrew the notice dated 30.06.2020 and issued a fresh notice dated 18.07.2020 (Annexure P-5) to the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner again submitted his reply to the notice dated 18.07.2020 o