' The petitioner is stenotypist in Education Department. Vide order dated 2-9-1987 of the Deputy Director (Admin), Directorate of Education (Schools), Gujranwala Division, Gujranwala, one advance increment was allowed to the petitioner under the policy circular dated 27-7-1987.
However, vide order dated 26-11-1990, it was withdrawn. The petitioner agitated the matter before the departmental authorities and ultimately vide order dated 12-9-1998 of the Deputy Director, he was allowed one advance increment from 1-7-1987 while another increment was allowed w,e,f, 1-6- 1991 vide the same order. The grievance in this petition is against the letter dated 27-10-1999 of the Accountant General, Punjab, directing the District Education Officer. To recover an amount of Rs,35,113/59. This letter does not disclose any ground to direct the aforesaid recovery. The District Accounts Officer, Mandi Bahauddin, in his report and parawise comments has stated that the advance increments were withheld on the basis of the letter of the Accountant General referred to above.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the office of the Accountant General had no authority to overrule the orders passed by the departmental authorities. His case is that the order granting advance increment was competently 'passed by the departmental authority, it was duly acted upon and implemented and even if there was any defect in the said order (without conceding that there was one). The amount of increments already drawn by the petitioner cannot be ordered to be recovered. Reliance was placed on the Engineer-in-Chief Branch through Ministry of Defence, Rawalpindi and another v. Jallaluddin (PLD 1992 S.C. 207) and Controlling Authority. N.- W.F.P. Board of Technical Education, Peshawar and another v. Abdul Salam Secretary, N.-W.F.P., Board of Technical Education (Presently Chairman of the Board) (PLD 1993 SC 200).
3. The judgments cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner fully support his contention that the amount of increments already drawn by the petitioner under the orders passed by the competent authority cannot be recovered from him.
4. For what has been stated above, this writ petition is allowed and the impugned letter dated 27- 10-1999 of the Accountant General Punjab is declared as without lawful authority and of no legal effect. No order as to cost.