1

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOS.288-289 OF 2005

YOGESHWAR PRASAD & ORS.                           Appellant (s)

                VERSUS

NATIONAL INST.,EDU.PLANNING & ADMN.&ORS.          Respondent(s)

WITH C.A.NO.209 OF 2007 J U D G M E N T

DALVEER BHANDARI, J. These  appeals  are  directed  against  the  judgment  dated  

31.5.2002 passed by a Division Bench of the  High Court of Delhi at  

New Delhi in L.P.A.NO.301 of 1997 etc. By this common judgment, we  

propose to dispose of Civil Appeals Nos.288-2009 of 2005  and Civil  

Appeal No.209 of 2007.

Brief facts which are relevant to dispose of these appeals  

are recapitulated as under:

The  appellants  in  Civil  Appeal  Nos.288-289/2005  were  

working  as  Assistants  and  Stenographers  with  Respondent  no.1-  

National  Institute  of  Educational  Planning  and  Administration,  

Delhi.   

The appellants in Civil Appeal No.209 of 2007 were working  

with  the  Sahitya  Academy,  Delhi  as  Accounts  and  Administrative  

Assistants/Assistants/Stenographers.  The appellants' were getting  

the  pay  scale  of  Rs.425-800  upto  1986.   The  Assistants  in  the  

Central Government were also getting the same pay scale. According  

to  the  IVth    Pay  Commission,  the  pay  scale  of  Assistants  and

2

Stenographers was revised from Rs.425-800 to Rs.1400-2600 in the  

Central Government.   

The  Anomalies  Removal  Committee  gave  its  recommendation  

increasing the pay scales from Rs.1400-2600 to Rs.1640-2900.  Though  

the recommendation of the Anomalies Removal Committee were accepted  

from    01.01.1986 but the   appellants   were not given   the   pay  

scale   of    Rs.1640-2900.  

According to the appellants, they were also entitled to  

the pay scale of Rs.1640-2900.  The Central Government vide letter  

dated 5.1.1990 approved the service regulations of the respondent-

Institute.  Regulation 4(2) provides as under :   

“4(2) Group  'A'  officers,  other  than  faculty  members and those on UGC grades of pay groups 'B',  'C'  and  'D'  employees  shall  draw  salary  and  allowances in such scales of pay as may be applicable  to the corresponding categories of Central Government  employees  and  be  subject  to  such  conditions  of  service  as  are  or  may  be  applicable  to  Central  Government employees from time to time.”

According to this regulation, the appellants were also entitled to  

the  pay  scale  which  was  extended  to  their  counterparts  in  the  

Central Government but the appellants were not given the pay scale  

of Rs.1640-2900. They were compelled to approach the High Court for  

the relief.  

The learned Single Judge of the Delhi High Court passed  

the following order in the case of Assistants and Stenographers of  

the National Institute of Educational Planning and Administration:

“IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

3

CW No.805/97

Heard the counsel for the parties and perused  the record. The grievance of the petitioners are that  they are also in the post of Assistant and Personal  Assistants (Steno).  Similarly situated organizations  have  been  granting  the  revised  pay  scale  for  such  posts  as  given  by  the  Central  Government  to  its  employees  whereas  the  respondents  are  not  implementing the revised pay scales on account of the  circular issued by the Ministry of Finance dated 11st  

December, 1990.  This court in CW No.290/95 decided  on  29th November,  1995  as  well  as  in  the  case  of  P.S.Gopinathan Nair & Ors. Vs. All India Institute of  Medical  Sciences.   C.W.No.4462/94  decided  on  16th  

October, 1995, has already given directions to the  similarly  situated  organizations  to  grant  the  pay  scale  at  par  with  the  employees  of  the  Central  Government.  Similar directions were also given in  the  case  of  the  Indian  Council  of  Agricultural  Research,  Indian  Council  of  Medical  Research  and  University  Grants  Commission.   The  case  of  the  petitioners  is  at  par  with  the  employees  of  other  organizations.

Taking  the  above  factors  into  consideration,  directions are accordingly given to the respondents  to  give  the  pay  scales  to  the  petitioners  as  admissible  to  the  Central  Government  employees  for  the  post  of  Assistant  and  Personal  Assistant(Stenographers).

With  these  observations  the  petition  stands  disposed of.

28.7.1997 Sd/- Usha Mehra Judge.”

The said judgment of the learned Single Judge was based on  

earlier judgments of the High Court passed in Civil Writ No.290/95  

decided on 29th November, 1995 and in Civil Writ No.4462/94 decided  

on 16th October, 1995. Respondent no.1-Institute aggrieved by the  

said judgment preferred a Letters Patent Appeal (for short 'L.P.A.')  

before  a  Division  Bench  of  the  High  Court.   By  the  impugned  

judgment, the LPA filed by the respondent no.1 was allowed by the

4

Division Bench along with other appeals. Against the judgment of the  

Division Bench, Review Petitions were filed, which were dismissed by  

the Division Bench of the High Court.  

The  appellants,  aggrieved  by  the  judgment  of  the  High  

Court, preferred these appeals. It may be pertinent to mention that  

the respondent-Institute was pursuing the case of the appellants  

with the Central Government for higher pay scale.  The respondent-

Institute in fact sent a letter to the Secretary, Ministry of Human  

Resource Development, Government of India, New Delhi on December 19,  

1994 praying that the appellants herein be given the revised pay  

scales of Rs.1640-2900. The letter reads as under :

“No.4-29-2/94-Pers. December 19,1994

The Secretary Government of India Ministry of Human Resource Development Department of Education Shastri Bhawan New Delhi -110 001

Attn:Sh.R.V. Vaidhyananthan Ayyar,       Joint Secretary(Plg.)

Sub: Revision of scale of pay of Assistants/       Stenographers.

Sir, The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare  

has conveyed approval of the Govt. of India of the  scale  of  pay  Rs.1640-2900  to  Assistants/  Sr.Stenographers Grade 'C' in place of Rs.1400-2600  working in the Indian Council of Medical research,  New  Delhi.  Therefore,  representations  from  the  employees  of  this  Institute  have  been  received  to  revise  their  scale  identical  to  those  adopted  for  corresponding  post  at  par  with  the  Central  Government.

SR 6(A)(iii) stipulate that the revision of  the pay scale of any post except that of Director  subject to the approval of the Govt. of India and

5

there upon the First Schedule shall stand amended in  accordance  with  such  directions.  Provided  that  approval of the Govt. of India would not be necessary  for adoption of pay scale and allowances identical to  those  adopted  for  corresponding  post  at  par  with  Central  Government/UGC  orders  issued  from  time  to  time except in case of general revision of scales of  pay of posts. Since, the pay scales of Assistant and  Senior Stenographer 'C' in the Central Government is  Rs.1640-2600,  therefore,  in  accordance  with  the  service regulations cited above, the demand of the  employees appear to be genuine.  It is, therefore,  requested that the case may kindly be considered at  your  end  in  consultation  with  Internal  Finance  Division and approval be conveyed so that the matter  is  placed  before  the  Executive  committee  of  the  Institute.......”

Thereafter  another  letter  on  August  1,  1995  was  sent  to  the  

Secretary,   Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of  

India,  New  Delhi  and  the  Institute  again  requested  the  Central  

Government to grant pay scale of Rs.1640-2900 to the appellants.  

The letter reads as under :

“No.F-29-2/94-Pers. August 1, 1995

The Secretary Govt.of India Ministry of Human Resource Development (Deptt.of Education) Shastri Bhawan New Delhi -110 001

Attention: Dr.R.V.Vaidyanathan Ayyar,                      Joint Secretary (Planning)

Subject:  Revision  of  scale  of  pay  of  Assistants/Senior                 Stenographers from Rs.140—2600 to Rs.1640- 2900.

Sir,

Kindly  refer  to  our  letter  of  even  number  dated  23.3.1995 and subsequent reminder dated 28.4.1995 on  the subject cited above (copy enclosed). Our Service  Regulations, which had been approved by the Govt. of  India, among other things provide that the scales of

6

pay  of  the  employees  of  the  NIEPA  other  than  the  faculty and those on UGC grades of pay shall be at  par with those of the Central Government Employees.

In this regard, it may be mentioned that some of  the Autonomous Organizations under Ministry of Human  Resource Development had allowed the revised scale of  Rs.1640-2900  to  Assistants  and  Senior  Stenographers  in their organizations.

It is, therefore, requested that approval of the  Govt. on the revision of scales in respect of the  above categories of employees of our Institute may  kindly be sent to us at the earliest.

Yours faithfully, Sd/-Illegible 1.8.95 (O.P.Sharma) Acting Registrar”

The  Director  of  the  respondent  Institute  again  sent  a  

letter on November 2, 1995 to the Education Secretary,  Ministry of  

Human Resource Development, Government of India, New Delhi in which  

it is mentioned that the Assistants and Senior Stenographers of the  

Institute be given the pay scale of Rs.1640-2900. The said letter  

reads as under :

“No.F-29-2/94-Pers. Kudleep Mathur Director  November 2, 1995

Dear Shri Das Gupta,

Kindly refer to the Institute's letter No.F-29- 2/94/Pers. Dated December 19, 1994 and the subsequent  letters of even number dated 23rd March, 1994, 28th  

April,  1995,  29th May,  1995  and  1st August,  1995  regarding  revision  of  pay  scales  of  Assistants/  Sr.Stenographers  'C'.   In  this  respect  it  is  submitted  that  the  Ministry  of  Health  &  Family  Welfare  has  conveyed  the  approval  of  the  Govt.  of  India  for  the  change  of  pay  scales  of  Assistants/Sr.Stenographers 'C' working in the Indian  Council of Medical research, New Delhi to Rs.1640- 2900  in  place  of  Rs.1400-2600.  The  JNU  and  other  universities are also having the scales of Rs.1640- 2900 for these categories of staff. It is learnt that

7

Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan have also change the pay  scales from Rs.1400-2600 to Rs.1640-2900 recently.

The employees of this Institute have persistently  been  demanding  that  their  pay  scales  may  also  be  changed  from  Rs.1400—2600  to  Rs.1640-2900.   The  Institute  have  only  7  posts  of  Assistants  and  10  posts  of  Sr.Stenographers  'C'  in  position.   The  revision  of  pay  scales  and  placement  of  these  employees  in  this  scale   I.e.  1640-2900  will  have  minor financial implications and the same would be  met out of the regular budget of NIEPA.

The  Service  Regulation  6A(C)  of  NIEPA  provide  that the revision of pay scales of any posts except  that  of  Director  subject  to  the  approval  of  the  Government  and  thereupon  the  First  Schedule  shall  stand  amended  in  accordance  with  such  directions.  Provided  that  the  approval  of  the  Govt.  of  India  would not be necessary for adoption of pay scales and  allowances  identical  to  those  adopted  for  corresponding post as per the Central Government/UGC  orders issued from time to time except in cases of  general revision of pay scales of posts.  Since the  pay scales of Assistants/Sr.Stenographers 'C' in the  Central  Government  is  Rs.1640-2900,  therefore,  in  accordance with the Service Regulations cited above,  the demand of the employees appears to be genuine.

I  shall  be  grateful  if  the  pay  scale  of  Assistants/Sr.Stenographer  'C”  of  the  Institute  is  also  changed  from  Rs.1400-2600  to  Rs.1640-2900  and  approval of the Ministry may please be conveyed so  that the matter is placed before Executive Committee  for  obtaining  ex-post-facto  approval.   Necessary  guidelines  for  effecting  changes  according  for  the  posts  of  Sr.P.A.(presently  1640-2900)  and  P.S.  To  (sic) may also kindly be given.

Yours faithfully, Sd/- (Kuldeep Mathur)

Shri P.R.Das Gupta Education Secretary Ministry of Human Resource Development New Delhi.”

It  may  be  pertinent  to  mention  that  all  these  

communications were sent by respondent no.1 on the strength of the

8

regulations of respondent no.1 which was approved by the Central  

Government.  The said regulation has already been set out in the  

preceding paragraphs.  

The  Vth Pay  Commission  has  granted  the  pay  scale  of  

Rs.1640-2900,  now  revised  as  Rs.5500-9000  to  the  appellants  and  

their counterparts working in the Central Government. We have been  

informed that even the VIth Pay Commission has further revised it to  

Rs.9300-15600 and presently the appellants and their counterparts in  

the Central Government are in that pay scale.   

The short question which arises for consideration in these  

appeals is why the appellants should not be given the pay scale of  

Rs.1640-2900 from the date when their counterparts have been given  

that pay scale in the Central Government?  Although the stand of the  

Institute has also been that the appellants are entitled for the pay  

scale  of  Rs.1640-2900  which  is  quite  evident  from  the  afore-

mentioned letters sent by the respondent institute to the Central  

Government.  The  Union  of  India  has  now  in  the  Vth and  VIth Pay  

Commissions has given that scale to the appellants.   

In  our  considered  view,  the  Division  Bench  was  not  

justified  in   setting  aside  the  judgment  of  the  learned  Single  

Judge.  It may be pertinent to mention that the Division Bench did  

not consider the service regulations of the National Institute of  

Educational  Planning and Administration. The case of the appellant  

no.1 herein was not even discussed or considered in the impugned  

judgment.

9

Mr.Amitesh  Kumar,  learned  counsel  appearing  for  the  

Institute-respondent no.1 tried to make out the case that duties,  

responsibilities and obligations of the  appellants were different  

to their counterparts functioning in the Central Secretariat and  

they were justified in not giving the same pay scale. But we do not  

find any merit in the submission because the respondent Institute's  

stand all through was that the appellants be given the pay scale of  

Rs.1640-2900.  At this stage, respondent no.1 cannot be permitted to  

take a somersault in this manner. The Union of India accepted the  

recommendations of the Vth and VIth Pay Commissions and are giving  

the appellants the same pay scale which their counterparts in the  

Central Government are getting. It may be pertinent to observe that  

these appellants were getting the same pay scale as was given to the  

employees  of  their  categories  in  the  Central  Government  up  to  

1.1.1986. The Union of India accepted the recommendation of the Vth  

and VIth Pay Commissions and are giving them same pay scale then how  

only  during  the  IIIrd  Pay  Commission  their  pay  scale  could  be  

different? and how their duties, obligations and responsibilities  

became different only for a brief period?

In our considered view, the appellants are entitled to get  

the benefit of pay scale of Rs.1640-2900 which their counterparts  

were getting in the Central Government during the relevant period.  

In case this amount has not been paid, the same may be paid to the  

appellants by the Institute within three months from today.

Civil Appeal No.209 of 2007:

The relevant facts of the case are briefly narrated below:

10

The  Sahitya  Academy  was  established  in  the  year  1952.  

Later on, it was registered under the Societies Registration Act,  

1860.  According to the Constitution of the Academy, its General  

Council is the highest authority, having the powers to inter alia,  

approved the budget and frame its own rules, regulations, bye-laws  

and rules of procedure and the Government of India does not have any  

role in the same. The Sahitya Academy (Service) bye-laws came into  

force on 4.3.1961. The rules of the Government of India with regard  

to  recruitment,  service  conditions  etc.  of  employees  are  fully  

applicable to the Academy. A bare perusal of the bye-laws would make  

it amply evident that so far the allowances, salaries etc. of the  

employees are concerned, they are absolutely at par with those of  

the employees of the Government of India. The employees in the cadre  

of Assistants/Stenographers in the Academy have been drawing the  

same pay scale as that drawn by the Assistant Grade of the Central  

Secretariat  Services  and  Grade  'C'  Stenographers  of  Central  

Secretariat Stenographers Service. This scale of pay was Rs.1400-

2600 after the recommendations of the IVth Central Pay Commission  

(pre-revised scale of Rs.425-800).

A High Powered pay committee was constituted pursuant to  

the  directions  of  the  Court  and  its  recommendations  were  

incorporated in a government notification dated 12.06.1990.  Clause  

11 of the said notification stipulated 'The employees in respect of  

whom the recommendations of the High Power Pay Committee are not  

being  implemented  under  the  orders  of  this  Court  dated  3.5.1990  

would get pay revision only as and when similar changes are being

11

affected for the central government employees.”

The Government of India on 31.07.1990 granted the revised  

scale of Rs.1640-2900 to the posts included in the Assistant Grade  

of the Central Secretariat Services and Grade 'C' Stenographers of  

Central  Secretariat  Stenographers  Service,  with  effect  from  

1.1.1986.  It was made clear in the order that the same revised pay  

scale would also be applicable to the Assistants and Stenographers  

in other organizations, where the posts are in comparable grade with  

same qualification and pay scale.   

The  appellants,  who  are  working  as  

Assistants/Stenographers/other  designations  in  the  same  cadre,  

started representing before the concerned authorities for grant of  

the revised scale of Rs.1640-2900 to them.

The Government of India issued another order on 11.12.1990  

which it directed that revised scale of Rs.1640-2900 granted to the  

Assistants/Stenographers of the Central Secretariat Services would  

not  be  applicable  to  the  Assistants/Stenographers  of  autonomous  

organizations.    

In response to an unstarred question in the Rajya Sabha on  

18.1.1991  regarding  revision  of  pay  scales  of  Assistants/  

Stenographers of autonomous organizations and statutory bodies, the  

then Minister replied that these bodies can decide on their own,  

whether or not to implement the revised scale of pay.  

The Central Administrative Tribunal on 21.12.1993 directed  

the Government of India to revise the pay scale of Stenographers and

12

Assistants  to  the  same  level  as  that  of  the  Assistants/  

Stenographers of the Central Secretariat Services.

The Indian Council of Medical Research issued letter on  

18.4.1994 extending the pay scale of Rs.1640-2900 to the Assistants/  

Stenographers.

The Government of India issued another letter on 6.1.1995  

stating  that  the  revised  scale  of  Rs.1640-2900  granted  to  the  

Assistants/Stenographers of the Central Secretariat Services would  

not  be  applicable  to  the  Assistants/Stenographers  of  autonomous  

organizations.

The  Indian  Council  of  Agricultural  Research  issued  an  

order on 7.6.1995 conveying the sanction by the competent authority  

of the pay scale of Rs.1640-2900 to its Assistants/Stenographers.

The Council of Scientific and Industrial Research issued  

an  order  on  9.6.1995  conveying  the  sanction  by  the  competent  

authority  of  the  pay  scale  of  Rs.1640-2900  to  its  Assistants/  

Stenographers.

The Delhi High Court passed orders directing payment of  

revised scale of Rs.1640-2900 to Assistants/Stenographers working in  

the  All India Institute of Medical Sciences.

The Finance Ministry, Government of India, issued a letter  

on 20.6.1996 conveying the grant of revised scale of Rs.1640-2900 to  

Assistants/Stenographers working in the National Institute of Health  

and Family Welfare.

The Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India,  

issued an order on 7.10.1996 conveying the grant of revised scale of

13

Rs.1640-2900  to  Assistants/Stenographers  working  in  the  Delhi  

Development Authority.

The  appellants  on  14.2.1997  sent  one  of  the  several  

representations seeking revised pay scale of Rs.1640-2900.  However,  

the appellants did not receive any favourable communication.

The appellants filed a Civil Writ Petition  No.559 of 1998  

before the Delhi High Court seeking quashing of the Government of  

India  order  dated  11.12.1990,  letter  dated  6.1.1995  and  for  a  

further  direction  that  the  revised  pay  scale  of  Rs.1640-2900  be  

granted to them.

The aforesaid writ petition filed by the appellants was  

allowed by a  single Judge of the Delhi High Court with a direction  

that the appellants be paid the revised pay scale of Rs.1640-2900,  

with effect from 1.1.1986. The respondent Institute gave the pay  

scale of Rs.1640-2900 to the appellants.

The Union of India preferred a Letters Patent Appeal (for  

short 'L.P.A.') bearing LPA No.92 of 1999, against the aforesaid  

order dated 16.10.1998.

The  Division  Bench  of  the  Delhi  High  Court  heard  the  

aforesaid  LPA  as  well  as  the  other  connected  appeals  and  writ  

petitions filed by the Union of India.  By an order dated 31.5.2002  

LPA  No.92/1999  was  allowed  as  also  the  other  appeals  and  writ  

petitions filed by the Union of India and thereby held that the  

revised pay scale of Rs.1640-2900 was not payable to the Assistants/  

Stenographers working in autonomous organizations/statutory bodies  

like the Sahitya Academy.

14

The Delhi High Court, in the impugned judgment, took into  

consideration the facts of the case relating to ESI corporation only  

and  as  such  the  individual  facts  relating  to  different  

organizations, including the Sahitya Academy, were not considered at  

all.

The appellants filed a review application before the Delhi  

High Court being Review Petition No.2000 of 2002. The Respondent-

Union of India filed a counter affidavit in the aforesaid Review  

Petition  No.2000/2002.   The  appellants  then  filed  a  rejoinder  

affidavit in the aforesaid Review Petition No.2000/2002.  The Review  

Petition was also dismissed.  The appellants have now approached  

this Court.

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.  In  

view  of  our  judgment  in  Civil  Appeal  Nos.288-289  of  2005,  the  

appellants  in  this  appeal  were  fully  justified  in  getting  the  

benefit of the revised pay scale of Rs.1640-2900 from 01.01.1986. In  

the instant case the appellants have already received the benefit of  

the revised pay scale. The question which arose for consideration  

was whether the respondents can recover the additional amount paid  

to the appellants.  In our considered view, the appelants in this  

appeal were fully justified in getting the benefit of the revised  

pay scale.  Even otherwise also the additional amount cannot be  

recovered from them.  

Mr.Amarendra Sharan, learned senior counsel appearing for  

the appellants in this appeal, submitted that the benefit of higher

15

pay scale granted to appellants cannot be recovered in view of the  

series of the judgments of this Court. He placed reliance on a three  

judge Bench judgment of this Court in  Shyam Babu Verma & Ors. Vs.  

Union of India & Ors., (1994) 2 SCC p.521 para 11, which reads as  

under :

“Although  we  have  held  that  the  petitioners  were  entitled only to the pay scale of Rs.330-480 in terms  of the recommendations of the Third Pay Commission  w.e.f. January 1, 1973 and only after the period of  10 years, they became entitled to the pay scale of  Rs.330-560  but  as  they  have  received  the  scale  of  Rs.330-560 since 1973 due to no fault of theirs and  that scale is being reduced in the year 1984 with  effect from January 1, 1973, it shall only be just  and proper not to recover any excess amount which has  already been paid to them.  Accordingly, we direct  that no steps should be taken to recover or to do  adjust any excess amount paid to the petitioners due  to  the  fault  of  the  respondents,  the  petitioners  being in no way responsible for the same.”

This judgment has been followed in the subsequent judgment of this  

Court in  Sahib Ram Vs. State of Haryana & Ors., (1995) Suppl.1 SCC  

p.18 para 5, which reads as under :

“Admittedly  the  appellant  does  not  possess  the  required  educational  qualifications.   Under  the  circumstances the appellant would not be entitled to  the relaxation. The Principal erred in granting him  the relaxation.  Since the date of relaxation the  appellant had been paid his salary on the revised  scale.   However,  it  is  not  on  account  of  any  misrepresentation  made  by  the  appellant  that  the  benefit of the higher pay scale was given to him but  by wrong construction made by the Principal for which  the appellant cannot be held to be at fault. Under  the circumstances the amount paid till date may not  be recovered from the appellant.  The principle of  equal  pay  for  equal  work  would  not  apply  to  the  scales  prescribed  by  the  University  Grants  Commission.  The appeal is allowed partly without any  order as to costs.”

Mr.Sharan  also  cited  another  relatively  recent  judgment  of  this  

Court in the case of  State of Bihar & Ors. Vs. Pandey Jagdishwar

16

Prasad, (2009) 3 SCC p.117  para 19 which reads as under :

“It  is  not  needed  for  this  Court  to  verify  the  veracity of the statements made by the parties.  If  at  all  the  respondent  entered  the  second  date  of  birth at a subsequent period of time, the authorities  concerned should have detected it and there should  have been a detailed enquiry to determine whether the  respondent was responsible for the same.  It has been  held in a catena of judicial pronouncements that even  if  by  mistake,  higher  pay  scale  was  given  to  the  employee,  without  there  being  misrepresentation  or  fraud, no recovery can be effected from the retiral  dues  in  the  monetary  benefit  available  to  the  employee.” In  view  of  a  series  of  judgments  of  this  Court,  the  

appellants are otherwise entitled to  the revised pay scale. the  

amount paid to the appellants-employees pursuant to the grant of  

higher pay scale should not be recovered unless it was a case of  

mis-representation or fraud.  Admittedly, neither mis-representation  

nor fraud can be attributed to the appellants in C.A.NO.209/2007.  

In  this  view  of  the  matter,  respondent  no.1-Institute  would  be  

restrained from recovering any amount which has already been paid to  

the appellants in C.A.NO.209/2007.

In the result, the impugned judgment is  set aside and  

Civil Appeals Nos.288-289 of 2005 and Civil Appeal No.209 of 2007  

are allowed and disposed of.  However, the benefit of this order  

would be confined to the    appellants   in Civil Appeals Nos.288-

289 of 2005 and Civil Appeal No.209 of 2007.  

17

In  the  facts and circumstances of these cases, we direct  

the parties to bear their own costs.  

...................J. (DALVEER BHANDARI)

...................J. (DEEPAK VERMA)

NEW DELHI; 21ST OCTOBER, 2010