SWWE EWQM @ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. AT - BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. u 03 OF 2011 : / RAJENDRA PRASAD GUPTA, AGED — 63 YEARS, S/O RAMESHWAR PRASAD GUPTA, RETIRED — HEAD MASTER, BALAK PRIMARY SCHOOL, PATTHALGOAN, BLOCK - PATTHALGOAN, DISTRICT — JASHPUR (C. G.) R/ O SADAR ROAD, SARANGARH, DISTRICT — RAIGARH (C. G.) PETITIONER VERSUS REsPONDENTs /V :1. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH, THROUGHT — THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SCHEDULE CASTE AND SCHEDULE TRIBE DEVELOPMENT, MANTRALAY, D. K. s. BHAWAN, RAIPUR . THE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OP SCHEDULE CASTE AND SCHEDULE TRIBE DEVELOPMENT, CHHATTISGARH, H. Q. H PANDIT RAVISHANKAR SHUKLA UNIVERSITY CAMPUS, RAIPUR (C. G.) THE coLLECTOR, SCHEDULE CASTE AND SCHEDULE TRIBE DEVELOPMENT, DISTRICT — JASHPUR (C. G.) ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, SCHEDULE CASTE AND SCHEDULE TRIBE DEVELOPMENT, DISTRICT — JASHPUR (C. G.) , X ' 'INNEKMIM‘EWW\ O x A \ I I [ 5. BLOCK EDUCATION OFFICER, PATTHALGOAN , DISTRICT - JASHPUR (C. G.) THE JOINT DIRECTOR, TRESUARY, ACCOUNT & PENSION, AMBIKAPUR ~ SURGUJA DmsmN, AMBIKAPUR (C. G.) Writ Petition under Article — 226 of the Constitution of India. ‘3\ HIGH COURT OF CHHATI'ISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETiTiON (S) NO. 403 OF 2011 Rajendra Prasad Gupta Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. ‘ PETITIONER RESPONDENTS Present :- Shri R.K.Keshan~ani, Advocate forthe petitioner. respondents. Shri Y.S.Thakur, Dy. Advocate General for the State/ e ORDEVR {ORALI (Passed on this 24' day of January, 201 1) 1. ' Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 16.8.2010 (Annexure P-t), whereby the authorities have deducted a sum of Rs. 2,83,301 /- and thereafter, it was observed that the rest amount of Rs.5,07,051/- is still recoverable. 2. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the deduction of the amount from his pensionary benefits, after retirement of the petitioner on 282.2009 is bad in law and contrary to the well settled principles of law, as held in Ramchandra Kurup v. state of Chhattisgarh & Others’ by this Court. 3. Shri Thakur, Dy. A.G. appearing for the respondents submits that there is no quarrel on the submission that after retirement, no recovery or deduction may be made without affording proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Accordingly, the authorities may be permitted to afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before taking a decision of deduction or recovery. W 1 2010(3) C.G.L.J. 400 .. 2 In view of foregoing and in light of the Ramchandra Kurup (supra), the impugned order dated 16 8 2010 (Annexure P-1) is quashed . However liberty Is reserved to the petmoner to take appropnate steps In accordance wuth law after affording proper opportunity of hearing to the petmoner. 5. Accordingly, the petition is allowed to the above extent. No order asto costs. v ”um‘ Sd/—' Satish K. Agnihotri Judge