@ HIGH COURT OF CH IATI‘ISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition LS} No. 2 134 of 2008 Petitianar Bhagat Ram Pandey, Ag€ about 63 years, Rtd. U.D.’l‘., Sfo Shri Dau Ram Pandey. R/o Ramnmahaka, Tahsil Kharsiya, Uistt. ~ Raigarh (C.G.) V6rsus Respondents 1. State Govt. of Chhatfisgarh, Through the Scerctary, Education Department, D . K. S. Ehawau, Raipm‘ (C.G.} Assistan: Develop-mam Commissioner, Tribal Welfara Department, Rajgarh (C.G.) 3‘ Joint Director, ’i‘reasuty, Accounts 8:, Pension, Bilaspur Division, tiilasgur {butt} Principal, Pxiyadarshini Indira Gandhi Govt H. S. School, Barra, Talisil — Kharsiya, Distt. RaigarhILC.) 5. The Collactor‘ ’I‘iibal Weif Te Department, Raigarh (C.G.) WT PETI'HON UNDER ARTICLE Z25 OF THE é0W§T§TUT20W $3: Hoo’blc Shi‘i gatish K. Agnihetri, J. N' 8111i L. C. Dag. Advocate for the petitioner. Shn' M. P. S. Bhatia, Dainty Govt. Advocate for the respondents. ORAL ORDER (Pasoed on this 1; 1‘1 day of April, 2068) . With the consent of learned counsel aopeariiig for 1e parties, the matter is heard finally. Q[ By this petition the petitioner has challenged the validity of the onier date 28.9.2307 (Annexnie Pf 1}, passed by the Authotized Officer {Pension} for reeovety of a sum of Rs. 25,700] —{l wenty Five Thousan , Seven Hundred) and the ‘n > order dat€d 21.11.2007 passsd by 1116 Joint Diractor, Treasury, Accounts and Pénaicm, Bilaspur, Whcxeby 11m representatisg of fhe petitioner has b€ea rsjected. . Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that a total rocovoijv’ of R3. 27,637}— has bean mado by tho 1‘C$pondents from tho room} (loos of tho patitionor, without affooimg an opporhmity o hearing to tho potitiouor. Learned counoel lolios 011 a ‘docision of Hoa’ble the Supreme Court in Sahib Ram Es. gtate of Hwyaaa and othersl and a decision of this Court i3 Vidyadhar Tiwari Vs. State 6f Chhattisgarh 86 others; in viow of the foregoing and as admitted by loaniod counsol appearing for boih ihe parties, this petition stands disposed of in terms of the ordcr passed in the case of Vidyadhar Tiwari (Supra), if tho impugned orders wele passe without a§ording an ooportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The orders dated 23.9.2007 (Annemn‘e P] 1} and 21. 11.2097 {Annexure Pf 2}”a1e quashed. The petitioner is entitled to fuil retiral benefits, Without any deduction. The amount, so deducted be paid to the petitioner with simple interest. However, the respondents are at Eberty to take recourse to Rule 65 of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976, if so advised, for the purpose of recovery and adjustment of Govennnent dues, in ace rdance with law and 4‘lotiowing 11 basic principles of natural justice. No order as to costs. in View of the‘above, this petition stands disposed of. No costs. Ch ‘ sw- i Satish K. Agnihotrii- i Judge w