ORDER S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. This application has been preferred by petitioner for direction on respondents to refund the amount of Rs. 21,418,80 paise (twenty one thousands four hundred eighteen and eighty paise only) as deducted from his gratuity and to pay full gratuity amount with statutory interest for the period 1st February, 2002 to November, 2002. 2. From the sanction order issued by the Director of Accounts, Jharkhand State Electricity Board, Ranchi (JSEB for short) it appears that the petitioner was in the services of the Jharkhand State Electricity Board (JSEB for short) retired on 31st January, 2002. When sanction order was issued by the Director of Accounts, Jharkhand State Electricity Board, Ranchi vide Memo No. 60/02/1663/EB JSEB. Ranchi dated 23th September, 2002 vide (Annexure-1) it is ordered to deduct a sum of Rs. 21,418.80 paise (twenty one thousands four hundred eighteen and eighty paise only) apart from quarter rent Rs. 909.29 paise (Nine hundred nine and twenty nine paise only). 3. According to petitioner the aforesaid amount of Rs. 21,418.80 paise (twenty one thousands four hundred eighteen and eighty paise only) has been ordered to be recovered on the ground that he had not passed Hindi Noting and Drafting Examination. In fact, he passed the Hindi Noting and Drafting Examination but not in time. 4. The respondents were allowed time to file counter-affidavit but no counter-affidavit has been filed. 5. The question whether any amount ran be recovered from the retiral benefits on the ground of non-passing of a departmental examination fell for consideration before a Bench of Patna High Court in the case of Dineshwar Singh v. BSEB, reported in 2000 (4) PLJR 119 . In the said case the Court held that the employer cannot be granted any liberty to deduct or recover the excess amount paid by way of increment at an early point of lime, if there was no misrepresentation on the part of the employee. 6. Similar was a view of the Supreme Court in the case BSEB and Anr. v. Bijay Bhadur and Anr., reported in 2000 (10) SCC 99 . 7. In the facts and circumstances, this case is remitted to the Director of Accounts, JSEB, Ranchi to determine the question of payment of gratuity taking into consideration the Supreme Court decision In the case of BSEB, and Anr. v. Biay Bahadur and Anr., (supra). v. Bijay Bhadur and Anr., reported in 2000 (10) SCC 99 . 7. In the facts and circumstances, this case is remitted to the Director of Accounts, JSEB, Ranchi to determine the question of payment of gratuity taking into consideration the Supreme Court decision In the case of BSEB, and Anr. v. Biay Bahadur and Anr., (supra). If there was no misrepresentation on the part of the petitioner the respondents will not recover any amount from his retiral benefits. 8. Appropriate decision in respect to the petitioner be taken and the admitted DCR gratuity be paid to him with statutory interest, if any, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of representation. 9. The Writ Petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions.