JUDGMENT : Ritu Bahri, C.J. Learned counsel for the appellant has referred to the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court reported in 2012 (8) SCC 417 , “Chandi Prasad Uniyal and others Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others” on the preposition that if excess salary is paid to an employee due to irregular/ wrong fixation of pay, recovery can be made from the employee. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant has referred to paragraphs 8, 13 and 14 of the judgment. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in this case was examining the case of the Teachers, whose pay-scale has been wrongly fixed on the basis of the 5th Central Pay Commission. They were all working, and on account of wrong fixation of pay a recovery was being effected from them, and in this backdrop the SLP was dismissed, and it was held that recovery can be made on account of wrong fixation of pay from the working employee, and in paragraph 7 of this judgment, it has been further observed that the appellants have given undertaking itself that if they received the pay on account of wrong fixation they will return the same. 3. The question whether the teachers had received this payment in the absence of any misrepresentation or fraud cannot be made basis for not making the recovery as they were all working employees, and they have given undertaking at the time of re-fixation of the pay as per the 5th Central Pay Commission. The ratio of this judgment cannot be applied in the present case, as in the present case, all the respondents have retired from the service, and post retirement, the mistake was found in grant of the ACP. In this backdrop, the judgment referred by the learned Single Judge in paragraph 44 of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and others” has been rightly applied in allowing the writ petition. Post retirement, the recovery cannot be made only on the ground that it is public revenue and it is tax payer money. 4. These appeals are being dismissed. A direction is being given to the appellant to comply with the judgment dated 14.06.2022, within the next three months.