- (1.) Heard Sri Surya Bhan Pandey, learned Assistant Solicitor of India assisted by Sri Varun Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners. The facts in brief of the present case are to the effect that the respondent-applicant, while working on substantive post of Postal Assistant, appeared in the examination for the post of Accountant and was declared successful and thereafter, special pay of Rs. 45 was given to respondent-applicant. The respondent-applicant was also provided the Time Bound One Promotion on 30.11.1983. Thereafter, in April 2005, on re-fixation of pay, the pay of the respondent-applicant was reduced and recovery was ordered, vide order dated 17.05.2005. Aggrieved by the re-fixation of the pay, the respondent-applicant filed an OA No. 239 of 2007 [ Ved Prakash v. Union of India and Ors .] before the Central Administrative Tribunal, which was allowed by the order dated 22.11.2013. The operative portion of the same reads as under:- "12. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as on the basis of observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court as observed in the case of State of Orissa v. Dr. Ms. Bina Pani Dei and Davinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab (supra), the O.A. deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the O.A. is allowed. The impugned order dated 17.05.2005 and 12.06.2006 are quashed. However, the respondents are at liberty to pass a fresh order after due opportunity of hearing is given to the applicant before passing any order. Nor order as to costs." In pursuance to the above, the case of the respondent- applicant has been considered and rejected by the impugned order dated 30.09.2014 and the order dated 16.09.2014. In the aforesaid factual background, the respondent- applicant again filed an OA No. 332/00346/2015 before the Central Administrative Tribunal with the following main reliefs:- "a. To quash the order dated 30.09.2014 and 16.09.2014 contained in Annexure A-1 and A-2 to this O.A and issue a direction to return back the amount received from the applicant. b. To issue a direction to restore his original basic pay with effect from November 1983 upto the date of retirement of the applicant and revise the pension, gratuity, commutation and other retiral benefits and pay the same with interest to the applicant. c. To issue any other order which this Hon'ble tribunal deems just and proper." After going through the pleadings, the Central Administrative Tribunal taking into consideration the various judgments has allowed the OA No. 332/00346/2015 and set-aside the orders impugned therein. The finding given by the Central Administrative Tribunal while allowing the original application is as under:- "13. My attention has been drawn towards the judgement rendered by the Honble Allahabad High Court in W.P No. (SB) 176 of 2009, UoI through Superintendent Post Stores Depot and Ors Vs Zahiruddin Ahmad decided on 17.02.2017. The perusal of this judgement reveals that the facts are identical to the case in hand. In the aforesaid case the relevant portion of the judgement contained in Para 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 are extracted herein below for ready reference:
(2.) This writ petition has been filed against judgment and order dated 24.09.2008 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') in Original Application No.101 of 2006, whereby Tribunal has allowed the said original application filed by Respondent No.1 and set aside the order of re-fixation and recovery of amount passed by the Authorities of Union of India at the fag end when the petitioner was going to retire on 30.06.2004.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that a wrong fixation of pay was made and when detected, it was sought to be rectified and recovery of excess payment was sought to be made. It is admitted that the alleged fixation was made on 26th July, 1983 and impugned order alleging rectification and recovery was passed on 17th May, 2004, i.e. after almost 21 years.;