K. Kannan, J. - (1.) CWP No. 12503 of 1989 contains a challenge to recovery which is sought to be made on the ground that two increments which were given to the Petitioner as LDC working in Haryana State Electricity Board was wrongly given to him and that it is liable for a refund. In CWP No. 164354 of 1989, the increments which had been given had been immediately withdrawn and the amount was also recovered by the impugned order.
(2.) LEARNED Counsel contends that the amount, when it was paid, was on the basis of a policy providing for increments for persons who had a Degree of Graduation and in its attempt to apply it only from a prospective date, the benefit which had already accrued was sought to be withdrawn. Learned Counsel refers to the decision of Full Bench of this Court in Budh Ram and Ors. v. State of Haryana, 2009 (3) PLR 511 that payment which had been made on no mis -representation or fraud and where there was no patent error such as clerical mistake, the amount given cannot be withdrawn. Applying the said decision, I hold that the impugned order directing refund as contained in CWP No. 12503 of 1989 is liable to be quashed. The recovery already made by the Electricity Board which is the subject of challenge in CWP No. 16434 of 1989 would be required to refund the amount recovered from the Petitioner within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. On default, the Petitioner in CWP No. 16434 of 19789 would be entitled to interest @ 7.5% from the date of this order. The writ petitions are allowed to the above extent.;