CWP-14324-2001(O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 209 SANTOSH KUMARI STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present:- None Mr. Aakash Singla, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA The quashing the order pay has been ordered to be recovered 2. Learned reduced in terms of the instructions not under challenge superannuation and retired from service 3. In view of the interfere with the reduced. However, State of Punjab and others 4 SCC 334, no since the benefit was granted to the petitioner by the Department 2001(O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP Date of Decision: SANTOSH KUMARI Versus OF HARYANA AND OTHERS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA None for the petitioner. Mr. Aakash Singla, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA, J. (Oral) The petition has been filed, inter alia order dated 13.12.2000, Annexure P reduced and the excess payment recovered. Learned State counsel contended that the in terms of the instructions vide memo not under challenge. Besides, she has already attained the age of superannuation and retired from service. In view of the facts aforementioned, with the impugned order to the extent the . However, in light of the law laid down State of Punjab and others v Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and others, no recovery can be allowed to be effected in terms of the order the benefit was granted to the petitioner by the Department IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-14324-2001(O&M) Date of Decision: 21.04.2026 …Petitioner(s) …Respondent(s) TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA Mr. Aakash Singla, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. inter alia, seeking a writ of certiorari , Annexure P-4, whereby the petitioner’s excess payment received by her has been contended that the petitioner’s pay was vide memo dated 27.09.2000, which are has already attained the age of facts aforementioned, this Court finds no ground to impugned order to the extent the petitioner’s pay was law laid down by the Supreme Court in (White Washer) and others, (2015) can be allowed to be effected in terms of the order, the benefit was granted to the petitioner by the Department on its own certiorari petitioner’s has been was , which are has already attained the age of finds no ground to petitioner’s pay was by the Supreme Court in ) , on its own Aman Dua 2026.04.28 17:19 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document CWP-14324-2001(O&M) and she has retired from service also. 13.12.2000 is set aside only to the extent effected from the petitioner. 4. T 5. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also disposed of. 21.04.2026 Ad 2001(O&M) -2- he has retired from service also. Accordingly, is set aside only to the extent recovery has been ordered to be from the petitioner. The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable Accordingly, the impugned order dated recovery has been ordered to be in the aforesaid terms. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand(s) (TRIBHUVAN DAHIYA) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No the impugned order dated recovery has been ordered to be stand(s) ) Aman Dua 2026.04.28 17:19 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this judicial document