HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** ****

Ishwar Singh Sangwan ... Petitioner VS.

State of Haryana & Ors. ... Respondents ****

1. Judgment reserved on 24.03.2026 2. Judgment pronounced on 12.05.2026 3. Judgment uploaded on 15.05.2026

4. Whether operative or full judgment Full 5. Delay in pronouncement of full judgment and reasons, if any NA ****

CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SANDEEP MOUDGIL ****

Present: Mr. Karan Bhardwaj, Advocate and Mr. Pardeep Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Rahul Dev Singh, Addl. AG Haryana ****

Sandeep Moudgil, J.

(1). The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, for issuing a writ of certiorari for quashing the order dated 27.07.2022 (Annexure P3) to the extent its orders recovery from pension of petitioner and withholding of arrears of pay. He seeks a direction to the respondents to release the arrears of pay and pension to the petitioner along with consequential benefits. Contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner (2). Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner retired as Executive Engineer on 31.03.1997 and had filed CWP-14275-2021 before this Court seeking the pay scale of Rs.13500-17250 w.e.f. 01.01.1996. During the pendency of that writ petition, the above-said relief was granted to the petitioner and the pay fixation was done in the grade of Rs.4100-5300 w.e.f. 27.09.1994 vide order dated 26.07.2022 (Annexure P2). He submits that the very next day, vide impugned order dated 27.07.2022 (Annexure P3), recovery was ordered from 01.05.1989 to 31.12.1995 of Rs.72900/- and the amount of arrears from 01.01.1996 to 31.03.1997 was assessed at Rs.9575 besides difference of DCRG of Rs.11,137/-, from his pension.

(3). He contends that the above said action has been taken after 25 years of retirement of the petitioner as on one hand, the respondents have granted pay fixation in the grade of Rs.4100-5300 and on the other hand, they have ordered recovery purportedly on the ground that the increments were given on account of an error which is against the dictum of the Apex Court passed in State of Punjab & Ors. vs. Rafiq Masih & Ors. (2015) 4 SCC 334 Counter by the respondents (4). Reply has been filed by the respondent wherein it has been averred that the petitioner retired from service w.e.f. 31.03.1997 while drawing pay in the pre-revised selection grade of Rs. 4100-5300/-, which had been allowed in view of Government instructions dated 02.06.1989, as the subsequent limitation of 20% of cadre posts of AE/AEE/SDEs imposed vide instructions dated 16.05.1990 was under challenge before the Courts and operation thereof had been stayed in certain matters and as such, the petitioner, being fully aware of the position, voluntarily undertook on 01.01.1997 and 22.09.1998 (Annexure R-1 & R-2) to effect recovery of any over-payment and also agreed to refund any excess amount found payable to him on account of discrepancies noticed later. However, subsequently, the pay of the petitioner was refixed in the pay scale of Rs. 13500-17250/- w.e.f. 01.01.1996 vide order dated 26.07.2022 (Annexure P-2), it was detected that the effect of office letter dated 11.10.2002 had never been given in his earlier pay fixation and that he had been continuously drawing inadmissible pay and pension higher than his actual entitlement due to pendency of litigation and omission of the then authorities.

(5). Heard learned counsel for the parties and this Court kept reserved the judgment on 24.03.2026.

Analysis & Finding (6). The petitioner retired as Executive Engineer on 31.03.1997 and, in CWP-14275-2021, claimed the revised pay scale of Rs.13500-17250/- w.e.f. 01.01.1996. During the pendency of that petition, the respondents themselves extended this relief and refixed his pay in the pre-revised selection grade of Rs.4100-5300/- w.e.f. 27.09.1994, with the corresponding revised scale of Rs.13500-17250/- w.e.f. 01.01.1996, vide order dated 26.07.2022