- (1.) The present appeal has been filed by the appellant-plaintiff who is dis-satisfied with the judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge, Panchkula dated 10.12.2008 since by said judgment and decree the appeal filed by the defendants was accepted and the judgment and decree dated 21.5.2008 passed by the trial Court in favour of the appellant-plaintiff, was set aside and his suit was dismissed.
(2.) The substantial question of law which arises in the present appeal is that whether orders dated 5.3.2001 and 24.5.2001, whereby recovery of Rs. 14873/-was effected from the plaintiff, without giving him any opportunity of hearing, is justifiable.
(3.) The case of the appellant-plaintiff was that he was serving as a Lecturer in Punjabi Department, Government College, Kalka and retired on 31.7.2001. He remained Director of defendant No.1-Haryana Punjabi Sahitya Academi, Panchkula, w.e.f. 27.1.1997 to 3.2.2000 and House No. 569, Sector 12, Panchkula, had been taken on rent for official use of defendant No.1-academi through its Director @ Rs. 6500/-per month vide rent deed executed between the landlord of the suit property and defendant No.1- academi through its Director, which is duly signed by the parties concerned. As per the rent deed, the rent of the suit property was to be increased subsequently after one year at the rate of 5% of the rent of the suit property and sanction regarding the same was granted by defendant No.3-Vice Chairman, Haryana Punjabi Sahitya academi, Panchkula and Commissionercum-Secretary to Government of Haryana, Chandigarh. Accordingly, rent was being paid to the landlord firstly @ Rs. 6500/-per month and subsequently at the enhanced rate after one year. The allegations in the plaint is that as Director of defendant No.1-academi, the appellant-plaintiff has paid rent upto October 1999 on behalf of defendant No.1-academi but from October 1999 till date, the rent has been paid by the new Director of defendant No.1- academi. Subsequently, audit proceedings took place and irregularity regarding the payment of enhanced rent was found and appellant-plaintiff was served with copy of order dated 5.3.2001 from the office of defendant No.3, through defendant No.5-Commissioner, Higher Education, Chandigarh and defendant No.5 vide notice dated 24.5.2001 brought it to the notice of appellant-plaintiff that defendants were entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 14,873/-from his service benefits. The appellant-plaintiff had filed replies to the above mentioned notices but without giving any opportunity of hearing to the appellant-plaintiff, notices dated 27.11.2001 and 10.12.2001 were issued for recovering the alleged amount from the service benefits of the appellant-plaintiff. Even 'no dues certificate' was not issued to the appellantplaintiff. It was, accordingly, alleged that the plaintiff is deprived of his right to which he is legally entitled and defendants have no right to retain the money/property of the appellant-plaintiff as there is no dishonest intention on the part of the appellant-plaintiff.;