w 0 .P,. (S) NoSlL3. /2o1 Shriva’st’av Kl ewala ekhulal ShrivaSt’ava, aged about 6 ri rs, Retd. Assistant Teacher Blc- jnandgaon (C .G.) PENER TITIO S/o Di n strict Rainandgao RETS x SPONDEN tate of Chhattisgarh h ERSU . Trough- h ecretar ucato epartment, Distt. Raipu‘r. Dt istric R Dct istri R (CG.) ajna‘ndgaonr . oc Education Officer ajnandgaon, ajnandgaOn (C.G.) T, reasury Accounts D, epartment District -R‘a,;ipur (C.G. reasury Officer ajnandgaon, ducatio fficer O, D- istrict Diet, rcor and ‘ Ripr au ) T , Pension Division, ainandgaon, istrict Rajnandgaon (C.G a Sh Sh 5 yea , ok Ra, VS 1 S — Te D Sy, Edih _ En Blk , R R Deputy R D .) 1 n .-.. ETITIONER Kewaal hvast Verus s R3 ‘SPONF‘tN VS State of Chhattisar & Othets gh (Writ Petition uner Article 226 of the Constitution of indua Smgle Bench Hon’ble Shrl Satlsh K Agmhotn J resent : P - Shn Basant Dewangan Advocate for the petitione Shn P K Bhadurx Panel Lawyerfor the State ORDER (ORAL) Passd is °8”‘ day of An' 201 1 ’e p ) haienge m this etition is to the order de 2007 (Annexur M) whereby, a sum of Rs 29 275I- has been directed to be recovere from the retrial dues of the petltloner holdrng It to be excess aymen made to the petitioner during the course of his serwce Learned counsel appearing for the etitioner submits that the petitioner white working as Assistant Teacher retlred from serVice on 31 03 2007 on attainlng the age of superannuation According to the petitioner th Impugned recovery has been made Without affording an opportunity o hearing to the petitioner, and further, the Issue asto whether recovery o xcess payment can be made without fottowing principles of natur ustice‘isino ionder res integra, the same has been settted by the upreme Court in the matter of Sahib Ram v State of Harvana an others and further foltowed by this Court in themmatter of Vidyadhar Tiwan v The State of Chhattisgam & Othersz andtuidya Shankar Tiwarr v State of M P (New State of Chhatt! arh am others and thereafter oiiowed in severai desisions e f f, e al ,j j S d ‘ g) f Thts Cocrt in Ramchandra Kurup v Qtate of G. & Qmers and other onnected matt observed as under V " c ers “19 A common thread running into th above decreions of the Supreme Court Is that for recovery of excess payment o emoluments/allowances there are three conditrons wherein the excess payment may be recovered namety (i) exces 1 0 t995 Supp (1 i soc 18 zoos (1 ) MPHT 105 (c 2010 (a) CGLJ 40 c) 3 2006 (2) MPHT 31 (CG) WRIT PETITION (S) NO. 51 29 OF 201 0. P l Sriava d ) r Cl p atd 12 O3 e P d pt . b e f s payment was made on accounf cf misrepresentation or fraud on the part of fhe’ employee, (1'17 the, empioyee had know/[edge that {he payment receiVe’d was in excess, and‘mi) the ermr was carrecied within a short span of time of wrong' payment...... ” ’% Learned counsel appearing for the Stateirespondents does not controvert the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that this matter may be disposed of in the same terms. ln View of foregoing and as admitted by learned counsel appearing for the parties, this petition is disposed of in the terms of the order passed int the case of Ramchandra Kurup". i.e. the impugned order dated 12.03.2007 (Annexure P/1) regarding recovery of an amount of Rs. 29,275i- from the retrial dues of the petitioner on account of excess payment, is hereby quashed. However, it is open to the respondents to take recourse to the provisions of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976, if so advised, in accordance with law, after following basic principles of naturai justice. Sd/- S'atish-K. Agnihotri . Judge