V3 HEGH COURT OF SHHRW33GARH: 3ILASF’UR Writ Petitian ($§ Nam. 1£0a 9f 2‘308 Petitioner Kusum Ram Patel. Slo. Late Jait Ram Patel, aged about $3 years: R/g. ViHage & Pest Pamgarh, TahsiS KharsEa, Digtt‘ Raigarh (CG). Versus Responderats 1}. ‘tate of Chhatti$garh through the Secretary; Tribai Weéfare Department; D.K.8. Bhawarzi Ralpur, District Raipu (CG; 2) Joint Direcicr Treasury Acoaunés & Perlsion, Biiaspur. Siamct Biiaspur (CG). :3) Assisiant CcmmissiCner, ‘mbai Welfare Deparimen’i, Jashp‘ur‘ District Jas’npur {0(3) 4) The Principai, GQVL‘ Hr. Sec. Schock, Kunkuri‘ District Jashpur {CG} (Writ Petition under Articie 226 of the Constiiution 0f mdia.) S3: Hon’bie Mr. $atish K. Agnihotri, J. Shri PK Bhaduri‘ Panel Lawyer forthe Sta‘Ee. 0%L 0R3ER Passed 9n a” day 9f July; 299$) The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher on ‘33-8-1968 in the , reseondents departmeni. The petitioner retired from services en attai mg the age ei superannuation en 1-5-2001 After his retiremeni,’ the petiiioner received a letter dated 14-”! 2008 (Annexure PH) directing recovery a sum e‘i R3525? 2!— on account cf excess payment made to the petitioner. 2) Learned courisel appearing for the petitiener submits that the-petitioner was n ot given any opperiuriitv ta expiain the eayment made to the petitioner. Thus, t its order ie vitiated for want of oomoiiance of the principies of nature! justice and fair oiay Err-action. 3) Per contra, iearneci counsei appearing for the respondentsfState submits that it is true that no show cause notice was given to t‘ne o titioner. The communications made between the officers was endorsed to the petitioner. The petitioner was not caiied upon to submit his expianation for payment of aiieoeci f adjusting himseif accordingy treating the same as his saiary. At this stage, directing recoveiy of the aiieged excess amcunt from the pensionary benefits of the petitioner wiii mt be just and propw. 9) in View of the reasons mentioned hereinabeva, this petition is aiiowed. The impugned ieiter dated 144—2668 (Annexure P/t) directing recovery a sum of Rs.525‘i2/— on account 0f excess payment made to the petitioner, is hereby quashed. The petitioner is emitted to fun peneionary benefitsigratuity amount without any deduction. if the amcunt has been recovered, the petitioner is entitied to the eaid amount with interest at the rate of 6% per anhum, However, it is open to the respondents to take recourse to Ruie 65 of the Chhattisgarh Civii Services (Pension)! Ruies, 1976, if so advised, in accordance with iaw foilowing basic principies of naturai jostice. No oroer asto costs ” Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge i