CWP-12366-2018 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT Dev Raj Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. & others CORAM: Present: NAMIT KUMAR 1. filing the instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of of option of the petitioner f benefits/time bound scale, as the petitioner 04.04.2006, which is evident from p 2) and also order dated service-book of the petitioner in terms of the Punjab State Electricity Board (Revised Pay) Regulation, 2009 (Annexure P re-fixed and reduced the pay by changing his date of option from ‘04.04.2006’ to (O&M) (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-12366 Date of Decision: Versus Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. & others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Mr. S.K.Rattan and Mr. Vishal Rattan, for the petitioner. Mr. Harsh Rana, Advocate, for Mr. H.S.Gharaun, Advocate, for the respondents. NAMIT KUMAR, J. (Oral) The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court by filing the instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents of option of the petitioner for grant of revised pay scale benefits/time bound scale, as the petitioner 04.04.2006, which is evident from page 23 of the service 2) and also order dated 24.12.2007, which is book of the petitioner in terms of the Punjab State Electricity Board (Revised Pay) Regulation, 2009 (Annexure P fixed and reduced the pay by changing his date of option from 04.04.2006’ to ‘01.04.2006’ on their own and have IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2366-2018 (O&M) Date of Decision: 06.07.2026 …Petitioner Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. & others ...Respondents NAMIT KUMAR ishal Rattan, Advocates, Mr. H.S.Gharaun, Advocate, for the respondents. H.S.Gharaun, Advocate, for the respondents. The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court by filing the instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, directing the respondents not to change the date or grant of revised pay scales and other benefits/time bound scale, as the petitioner opted for option w.e.f. 23 of the service-book (Annexure P- .2007, which is recorded at page 19 of the book of the petitioner in terms of the Punjab State Electricity Board (Revised Pay) Regulation, 2009 (Annexure P-1), but the respondents have fixed and reduced the pay by changing his date of option from and have further ordered recovery The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court by , not to change the date and other opted for option w.e.f. - 19 of the book of the petitioner in terms of the Punjab State Electricity Board have fixed and reduced the pay by changing his date of option from further ordered recovery VIMAL KUMAR 2026.07.09 14:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-12366-2018 (O&M) of a sum of petitioner's pensionary benefits. 2. was initially appointed as Assistant Lineman with the respondents Corporation pay of Rs.1000/ submitted that the petitioner’s year. The respondents implemented Commission report applicable w.e.f. 01.01.2006 Finance Circular dated 15.10.2009 been revised provided in para 5 of the said that the petitioner bound promotional entries in this regard Annexures P 31.05.2015. 3. petitioner’s Rs.11700/- vide Annexure P affording him Rs.32,698/- Learned counsel of the principles of natural justice (O&M) (2) of a sum of Rs.32,698/-, which has been deducted from the arrears of the petitioner's pensionary benefits. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Lineman with the respondents Corporation on 04.04.1997 in the pay scale of Rs.950 pay of Rs.1000/-, which was subsequently revised submitted that the petitioner’s annual increment The respondents implemented the recommendations of Commission report applicable w.e.f. 01.01.2006 Finance Circular dated 15.10.2009, whereby been revised in terms of option exercised by him provided in para 5 of the said circular dated petitioner was also granted the benefit of promotional scales w.e.f. 04.04.2006 and 04.04.2013 respectively entries in this regard were duly recorded in his service Annexures P-3 & P-4. Thereafter, the petitioner retired 31.05.2015. Learned counsel for the petitioner petitioner’s basic pay was unilaterally vide Annexure P-5, without issuing any show cause notice or him an opportunity of personal hearing was recovered from the arrears of his pensionary benefits. Learned counsel also argued that the action of the respondents is in violation of the principles of natural justice, as neither any specific order reducing , which has been deducted from the arrears of the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Lineman with the respondents- in the pay scale of Rs.950-1800/- with an initial revised to Rs.3260-5300/-. It is annual increment fell due on 1st April of every the recommendations of 5th Pay Commission report applicable w.e.f. 01.01.2006, which were issued vide , whereby the pay of the petitioner has exercised by him w.e.f. 04.04.2006, as dated 15.10.2009. He further submits the benefit of 9 years’ & 16 years’ time- 04.04.2006 and 04.04.2013 respectively and in his service-book annexed as Thereafter, the petitioner retired from service on Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the unilaterally reduced from Rs.12490/- to without issuing any show cause notice or an opportunity of personal hearing. Consequently, a sum of recovered from the arrears of his pensionary benefits. the action of the respondents is in violation as neither any specific order reducing the , which has been deducted from the arrears of the petitioner submits that the petitioner - initial . It is April of every Pay issued vide the pay of the petitioner has as . He further submits - and book annexed as on the to without issuing any show cause notice or a sum of recovered from the arrears of his pensionary benefits. the action of the respondents is in violation the VIMAL KUMAR 2026.07.09 14:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-12366-2018 (O&M) petitioner’s basic pay was hearing was afforded to 4. Corporation, preliminary objections of the written statement pay has rightly been exercised any option for fixation of his pay 5. respondents- petitioner opted for fixation of his basic pay w.e.f. 2) and the said op fixed in the revised pay scale and promotional granted to the petitioner on Annexure P petitioner. 6. the record. 7. petitioner opted for The said option was accepted by the respondents pay scale was fixed w.e.f. Simultaneously his basic pay was (O&M) (3) basic pay was ever passed nor an hearing was afforded to the petitioner before Per contra, learned counsel representing the respondents while referring to the averments preliminary objections of the written statement pay has rightly been fixed w.e.f. 01.01.2006, as exercised any option for fixation of his pay in the revised pay scale To controvert the said contention raised on behalf of the Corporation, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner opted for fixation of his basic pay w.e.f. and the said option was accepted by the resp fixed in the revised pay scale and even the benefit of time promotional scale on completion of 9 years’ & 16 years’ granted to the petitioner on 04.04.2006 and 04.04.2013 respectively Annexure P-3 and P-4, which are entries in the service I have heard learned counsel for the parties and In pursuance of the revision of pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.2006, the petitioner opted for fixation and grant of revised pay scale w.e.f. The said option was accepted by the respondents pay scale was fixed w.e.f. 04.04.2006 by refixing his basic pay at Rs.4775/ imultaneously, he was granted 9 years’ time his basic pay was re-fixed at Rs.5125/- w.e.f. passed nor any opportunity of personal before effecting such recovery. Per contra, learned counsel representing the respondents- while referring to the averments contained in para 4 of the preliminary objections of the written statement, submits that the petitioner’s 01.01.2006, as the petitioner never in the revised pay scale. controvert the said contention raised on behalf of the Corporation, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner opted for fixation of his basic pay w.e.f. 04.04.2006 (Annexure P- ion was accepted by the respondents and his pay was even the benefit of time-bound scale on completion of 9 years’ & 16 years’ of service was 04.04.2006 and 04.04.2013 respectively vide 4, which are entries in the service-book of the I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the revision of pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.2006, the fixation and grant of revised pay scale w.e.f. 04.04.2006. The said option was accepted by the respondents, and his pay in the revised 04.04.2006 by refixing his basic pay at Rs.4775/-. time-bound promotional scale and w.e.f. 04.04.2006 (Annexure P-3). opportunity of personal - in para 4 of the the petitioner’s the petitioner never controvert the said contention raised on behalf of the Corporation, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the - ondents and his pay was bound of service was vide book of the perused the revision of pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.2006, the 04.04.2006. and his pay in the revised . scale and . VIMAL KUMAR 2026.07.09 14:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-12366-2018 (O&M) Subsequently, on completion of time-bound promotional scale at Rs.17,130/ Rs.4300/-. From th petitioner was his pay in the revised pay scale and promotional scales on completion of 9 years’ & 16 years’ 04.04.2006 and 04.04.2013 8. Rs.12490/- t pensionary benefits nor an opportunity violation of the principles of natural justice. law that no recovery can be made from by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Masih (White Washe 9. action of the respondents in reducing the Rs.12490/- to Rs.11700/ Rs.32698/- from and is hereby set aside. The respondents are hereby directed to grant all the consequential Rs.12490/- and refund the recovered amount of interest at the rate of 7% p.a. from the date of recovery till the date of (O&M) (4) Subsequently, on completion of 16 years’ of service bound promotional scale w.e.f. 04.04.2013 at Rs.17,130/- in the pay scale of Rs.10900 . From the aforesaid, it is clear that the option petitioner was duly accepted by the respondents and pay in the revised pay scale and while granting the promotional scales on completion of 9 years’ & 16 years’ 04.04.2006 and 04.04.2013, respectively. Furthermore, while reducing the petitioner’s basic pay from to Rs.11700/- and effecting recovery of Rs.32,698/ pensionary benefits, neither the petitioner was issued any show cause notice opportunity of personal hearing was ever afforded to him violation of the principles of natural justice. law that no recovery can be made from a retired employee, as has been held by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in ‘State of Punjab & others Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) & others’, AIR 2015 SC 696 Keeping in view the above, the present petition is allowed. The action of the respondents in reducing the to Rs.11700/- w.e.f. 04.04.2006 from his pensionary benefits (Annexure P and is hereby set aside. The respondents are hereby directed to grant all the consequential monetary benefits to the petitioner on the basic pay of and refund the recovered amount of interest at the rate of 7% p.a. from the date of recovery till the date of 16 years’ of service, he was granted the next 04.04.2013, and his basic pay was fixed in the pay scale of Rs.10900-34800/- with Grade Pay of , it is clear that the option exercised by the duly accepted by the respondents and acted upon while fixing while granting the time-bound promotional scales on completion of 9 years’ & 16 years’ of service w.e.f. while reducing the petitioner’s basic pay from recovery of Rs.32,698/- from his neither the petitioner was issued any show cause notice of personal hearing was ever afforded to him, which is in violation of the principles of natural justice. It is well-settled proposition of retired employee, as has been held State of Punjab & others Vs. Rafiq , AIR 2015 SC 696. in view the above, the present petition is allowed. The action of the respondents in reducing the petitioner’s basic pay from 04.04.2006 and effecting recovery of (Annexure P-5) is held to be illegal and is hereby set aside. The respondents are hereby directed to grant all the benefits to the petitioner on the basic pay of and refund the recovered amount of Rs.32698/- along with interest at the rate of 7% p.a. from the date of recovery till the date of actual , he was granted the next fixed of by the while fixing bound of service w.e.f. while reducing the petitioner’s basic pay from from his neither the petitioner was issued any show cause notice which is in settled proposition of retired employee, as has been held State of Punjab & others Vs. Rafiq in view the above, the present petition is allowed. The basic pay from recovery of is held to be illegal and is hereby set aside. The respondents are hereby directed to grant all the benefits to the petitioner on the basic pay of with actual VIMAL KUMAR 2026.07.09 14:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. CWP-12366-2018 (O&M) payment. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within months from the date of receipt of certifi 06.07.2026 Vimal (O&M) (5) The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of three copy of this order. (NAMIT KUMAR) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No a period of three VIMAL KUMAR 2026.07.09 14:03 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.