JUDGMENT Ashok Kumar Gaur, J. - The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the Corrigendum dated 13th March, 2018 (Annexure - 1) whereby Grade Pay of the petitioner, granted in promotion order dated 29th June, 2017 (Annexure - 2), is revised as 5200-20200+Grade Pay 2800 instead of 9300-34800+Grade Pay 3600. The said order further directs excess payment made, to be recovered, from the petitioner. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner came to be promoted on the post of Meter Inspector - I from Meter Inspector - II against the vacancy year 2017-18 vide Office Order No.618 dated 29th June, 2017 and while promoting the petitioner, he was granted pay-scale of Rs.9300-3400 with Grade Pay of Rs.3600. 3. The petitioner has pleaded that after his promotion and grant of pay-scale, the respondents, in an arbitrary manner, issued impugned Corrigendum dated 13th March, 2018. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned Corrigendum was passed without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and further, action of the respondents is illegal. 4. Learned counsel argued that since there was no misinterpretation from the petitioner to the respondents and if increased pay-scale was provided to the petitioner, the same could not have been withdrawn. 5. Learned counsel further argued that the respondents had decided to implement benefits of 7th Pay Commission for the employees and as per order dated 1st January, 2018, the petitioner, being beneficiary of the said order, the initial order dated 29th June, 2017, passed by the respondents, was required to be maintained. 6. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is also entitled for benefits of 7th Pay Commission. 7. Learned counsel, appearing for the respondents, submitted that the petitioner is not entitled for the pay-scale of Rs.9300-34800 and due to oversight in the order of promotion, wrong pay-scale and Pay Band was mentioned and as such Corrigendum dated 13th March, 2018 was issued. 8. Learned counsel for the respondents further submitted that all the persons, who have been promoted on the post of Meter Inspector - I from Meter Inspector - II, are entitled for Pay Band of Rs.5200-20200 with Grade Pay of Rs.2800 and as such, no undue benefit can be conferred on the petitioner. 9. 8. Learned counsel for the respondents further submitted that all the persons, who have been promoted on the post of Meter Inspector - I from Meter Inspector - II, are entitled for Pay Band of Rs.5200-20200 with Grade Pay of Rs.2800 and as such, no undue benefit can be conferred on the petitioner. 9. Learned counsel for the respondents has drawn attention of this Court towards an order dated 7th June, 2017 where one person - Ram Kumar Sharma, working as Meter Inspector - II, was promoted to the post of Meter Inspector - I in Pay Band of Rs.5200-20200 and as such, it is pleaded that all the persons should get the same pay-scale, who have been promoted from the post of Meter Inspector - II to Meter Inspector - I. 10. Learned counsel further submitted that if any order is issued due to oversight, the employer cannot be denied to withdraw the same. 11. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record. 12. This Court finds that the Corrigendum dated 13th March, 2018 was issued by revising pay-scale of the petitioner from 9300-34800 to 5200-20200, as revised Pay Band was liable to be paid to all the employees. The Office Order dated 29th June, 2017, promoting the petitioner, in fact had mentioned wrong pay-scale and Grade Pay and as such the petitioner cannot be granted pay-scale, for which, he is not entitled. 13. This Court finds that in pursuance of the Corrigendum dated 13th March, 2018, the respondents issued an order effecting recovery of Rs.65,455/-, however, there was an interim order passed by this Court on 30th May, 2018, restraining the respondents to effect recovery, thus no recovery in fact has been made from emoluments of the petitioner. 14. This Court finds that since the order of recovery was stayed, in fact, the respondents could not make any recovery and as such the petitioner has not suffered any prejudice on account of issuance of the Corrigendum dated 13th March, 2018. 15. This Court finds that the respondents will not be entitled to effect any recovery from the petitioner, as he was promoted vide order dated 29th June, 2017 and if wrong pay-scale was mentioned and the petitioner has drawn the benefits without any misinterpretation, the employer should not be permitted to recover the same. 16. 15. This Court finds that the respondents will not be entitled to effect any recovery from the petitioner, as he was promoted vide order dated 29th June, 2017 and if wrong pay-scale was mentioned and the petitioner has drawn the benefits without any misinterpretation, the employer should not be permitted to recover the same. 16. This Court further finds that the petitioner cannot be held entitled for pay-scale of Rs.9300-34800 with Grade Pay of Rs.3600 and as such the respondents-employer will be at liberty to fix the petitioner in proper pay-scale of Rs.5200-20200 with Grade Pay of Rs.2800 and accordingly, pay all the other benefits, be permitted to the petitioner. 17. In view of the aforesaid, the present writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondents not to make any recovery in pursuance of the Corrigendum dated 13th March, 2018 and further they are directed to fix the petitioner in the pay-scale of Rs.5200-20200 with Grade Pay of Rs.2800 from the date, the petitioner has been promoted. 18. In view of the aforesaid, it is expected from the respondents that claim of the petitioner will be considered and if he is entitled for benefits of 7th Pay Commission, the same will be released in his favour within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.