M.Y.EQBAL, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned counsel for the B.S.E. Board and Mrs. I. Sen Choudhary, learned counsel for the J.S.E. Board.
(2.) PETITIONER who is still in service is aggrieved by the letter as contained in letter dated 8.2.2001, whereby the respondents have taken decision to deduct certain amount from the salary of the petitioner for the reason that although he did not pass Hindi Noting and Drafting Examination but received benefits of the salary from 1979 to 1991. Admittedly, petitioner passed Hindi Noting and drafting examination in 1991 and there is no allegation that by misrepresentation of fact or by any fraudulent way, petitioner got the benefits of salary without passing Hindi Noting and Drafting Examination. A similar question was considered in CWJC No. 8292 of 1996 and a Bench of Patna High Court following the judgment of the Division Bench has held that the increment paid to the petitioner without any misrepresentation should not be recovered from his salary. Even if the petitioner is in service, any amount which was paid by way of increment with the assumption of passing Hindi Noting and Drafting Examination and without any misrepresentation of fact from the side of the petitioner cannot be recovered, I fully agree with the view taken by the learned single Judge following the judgment of Division Bench of the Patna High Court.
(3.) IN that view of the matter, the impugned letter purporting to deduct certain amount from the salary of the petitioner cannot be sustained in law. This writ application is allowed and the impugned letter as contained in Annexure 1 to the writ application is set aside.;