HI6H COURT OF WHATTLSGAW AT BILASPUR Writpetition f5) No. 1507 of 2007 Peti+ioner Ratiram Khandey Son of Late Shci Scniran". Khandey, c^ed about 62 years, tetired Lecturer, Resident of yiltage Pendari Konan, Post Saki'i. Tahsi! Takhatpur, District Bilaspur (c.©.5. Versus ^; .^^ Respondents 1. 2. 3. Sta+e of Chhattiggarh, Throuoh : The Secretary, Depart-ment of Schoo! Education,, D.K.S. Bhawan, ftaipur (C.6.5 The Deputy Oirector/Prescribed Officer (Sfinction), office of Joint birector, Treosury, Account and Pension, Bilaspur Diyision Bilaspur (C.G.). The Joint Director Treosury, Account oind Psnsion, Bilaspur Oivision Bibspur (C.6.). The District Tremsury Officer, Bibspur (C.6.). WRFT PETTTtON UN&ER AKTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTETVnoN SB: 1-ion'ble 5hri Sfltisk K. ^gnihfl'fri, .7. 5hri N. L Soni, Advocate. for the petitioner. Shr-i M- P. S. Bhatia. beputy Sovt. Advocste for the respondents. ORAL ORDER (Passed on this 7th day of May, 20C%) 1- By this petition the petitiorier hns chalienged the volidfty of •tiie order dated 31-7.2CK36 (Anriexure P/l), whereby the respondents haye directed recovery of a sum of Rs. 54,545/- (Fifty pour ^' Thouamd Five l-1undnad porty Five) fn»m +he retir-ol dues of the petitioner. 2- Leamed counsel oppearing for the petitioner submits •Aat the petitioner was appointed as Assistiint Teacher on 26.7-t965. Thereafter, •rtie petitioner was promoted on the post of Upper &ivision Teacher on 28.1.1982 and w.e.f. 13.7.1989 +he peti+ioner wms promoted aa Head Mas+er (Pmdhan Pathak). The petitioner waa promoted as Lec+urer on 16.6.1997 and he waa retired fram serwce on 31.8.2006. 3- The 5'i'a-te of Madhyo Prodesh, Schoo! Educa+ion &epartmen-}' issued the order c!ated 1/4.7.2000(4nnexure P/4) uiherein it is provided that the ensployees who wene promoted from the post of Meod Master to -rtie po^t of L&c+urer be giwn the benefit of FunciamM'itesl Rule 22-& in fixation of satnry. Similor order waa 'iaaued by ihe S-hite of Oihatttegarh on 12.10.2004 (<4nnexure P/5). Accordingty, while the petitioner was promotied from the post of Meoc) Moste.r to the post of Lecturw, he was allowed the benefit of the provisions of Fundanienta! tejle 22-& in fixation of his salarv- 4. Afl-er retirement of the petitioner. by the impuaned order dated 31.7.2006 (Annexure P/l) it has been intiirwtBc) to the petitioner thflt a sum of Rs. 54,S45/- is to be recovered from his retirol dues, css we.c&es payipent, without affor'ding an oppor'iunity of hearing to tha petitioner- -—'—~~ Thakw 5- In support of his contention that the recovery cannot be made wi-thout affording an oppor-tunity of hearing.learned counsel reiies on a decision of Hon'ble +he &jpreme COUF+ in Sahib Raftl Vs. Stat®of Haryana and ofhers and a dscision of this Court in ,2. Vidyadhar Thffari Vs. Stal®of Chhattjsgarh & ofhen 6. In view of the foregoing gnd as admitted by learnecl counse! appearing for both the part-ies. this petition stands di^oeed of in terms of the order passed in -riie case of Vidyadhor Tiwari (Supru). if the iiiipugned order was passed without offordEna an opportunity of hanring to the peti+ioner. The order dated 31-7.2006 (Annexure P/l) is quaAed. The petitionar is entitled to ful! retirol benefits, without any deduction. The omount, so deducted be pnid to the petitioner with simple interest. 7. f-Souiever, it is open to the re^?ondents to take recourse to Rule 65 of the Chhattisgarh Civit Services pension) Ruiefi, 1976, if so advised, for the purpose of recovery and udjustment of fiovemment dues, in accordance with taui and following bosic principles of mtura! justice. No order as to costs- 8- In view of the above. this petition 'is allowed to the above eyi'ent. Mo costs. Sd/- - K-.;: SatishK.AgnWtr1 ,.Judge ,1^ ; {1995 5upp(1)5.cr. 20'}, {2006 (1) MP.H.T. 105 {CS.f }