1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.587 OF 1999. Swami Shivhar Damodar and another ... Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra and another ... Respondents. ... Mr.R.T.Nagargoje, advocate for the petitioner. Mr.V.D.Rakh, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for the State. Mr.E.P.Sawant, advocate for the Respondent No.2. ... CORAM : B.R.GAVAI AND : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,JJ. Date : 06.08.2010. ORAL ORDER (Per S.V.Gangapurwala,J.) 1. The petitioner seeks directions against the Respondents to quash the recovery regarding 2 the payment of overtime allowance paid to the petitioners. 2. The petitioners were allowed overtime allowance at the rate of Rs.12.50 per hour. The Respondents claim that the said amount was wrongly paid and the overtime was only Rs.6-60 per hour and as such had claimed recovery. 3. It is not the case of the Respondents that the petitioners by misrepresenting or playing a fraud have received the amount which was paid to them. It is a settled law that if the employer makes the payment though under an erroneous believe, the same can not be allowed to be recovered as is held by the Apex Court in case of "Syed Abdul Qadir and others Vs. State of Bihar and others" (2009) 3 Supreme Court Cases 475. 4. In light of the above, we make Rule absolute in terms of prayer clause (D). (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) (B.R.GAVAI,J.) asp/office/wp58799 3