S C^ I IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P. (S)No. \^ " OF 2011. PETITIONER ^o- ^* \<12-7^-: ..^^^ **\~^> \.^-"" ^y->'" Panchu Ram Sahu, S/o. late Shri Anjori Ram Sahu, aged about 68 years, Retired Head Master, R/o. Golkurahada, Post Khartha, Block Charama, District Kanker (C.G.). VER S U S RESPONDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C. G, a»n^*--~'^^ 2. Divisional, Joint Director, Treasury, Accounts and Pension, Division Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C. G.) 3. Block Education Officer, Charama, Block Charama, District Kanker (C.G.) ^y^ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA The petitioner named above begs to submit as under: t .-•SS1'^;-s«s5sa, ;? if ..rfSB^, 1 >' v>.^/e?'iaQi N t' iiS--.";^».sS?a il! i;> ^::s^";r"f""'^ !^ ^£.s^' ^ /•' HIGI-1 GOUR^QRGNHATnSGARH: BtLASPUR PETITIONER WRIT PETITION (S^ N0.1308 OF 2011 Panchu Ram Sahu RESPONDENTS Vereus » Stateof Chhattisaarh & Othere (Writ Petition under Article 226 of ttw Constihrtion o< India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnthotri, J. Present:- Shri Somkant Verma, Advccate for the p^itioner. Shri P.K.Bhaduri, Panel Lawyer for the State/re^iondents. ORDER (ORAU (Passed on 10th day of Mareh, 2011) 1. Challenge in this petition is to the oitier dated 07.01.2005 (Annexure P/1) whereby, a sum of Rs. 27.228/- has been eNrectedi to be recovered ftom the retrial dues of the petltioner, holdlrg jtto be excess payment made to the petitioner dunng^the^ his "service.'"'1''^" ' ! : ! : ' ;" 2/ ShriVerma, leamedcpynsel appearingfqrthepeW the petiUpner, while workii^ ss Head^ Departmentt retired frpm senflee 13.12.2004 pnattainingthe aQe of sup^iannu9tk)n, Accwding to S>hri \terma, the jmpygnedrecovery has been made without aftording an opportunity <rf h^ petitioner, and further, the is^re asto whetherrecoyery pfj^ payment can be made withput fpHo^g principlro ofiiet^ is rmtonger res mtegra, the same tes been settled ^^ Courtinthemattero^ further ftHlowed by Uijs Court in the matter of VKfyacff»arTAiwri y: The Stateof C^aftfega^ & Pfffe^and V?d^ Sftaflfcar Zfl^^^^ of Mf,( 3WStafeMChhattsgaW inseveral deasions. ? 3 3: jtvs^ii^VtF^rm^ndryKurupy.^ connected mattere, obsefved as under: i °19. A cqmmon thread running intq ttie above decislons ofthe Supreme Court is thatyfcrrwoyery , of excess payment crf enrotume|Tts/altowamces;ther®" '1995Supp(1)SCC18 3—=:————^ (CG) (CC?) .^•'isKS 6. w ^ ttwee sonditlons whereln the wccess payment nray be recovered, namely (i) excess payment was macle on account of misrepresentation or fraud on the part of the emptoyee, (B) the employee had knowledge that the payment receiv«Jwas in excess, and (iii) the error was correctaj wfthin a short span of time of wrong payment......" Leamed counsel appearing for the State/re^sondents does not controvert the submisshMis made by leamed counsd for thepeUtloneF and submits thatthis mattermay be disposedof intheaam^termfe . In view oftheforegolng and asadmitted by leamed counsel appearing for the parties, this petition is dlsposed of 1n the terms oftthe ord passed in the case of Ramc/ianflfra Kump . l.e. the impugned oFder dated 07.01.2GC5(Annexure P/1) regarding recovery of ar»amowrt of Rs. 27,228/- from the retrial dues of the petitioner on accoufit ^ excess payment,®hereby quashed. The petittoner isentiUedto fHll pehsipnary benefits/gratulty ampunt without any deduction. tf (he amount has been rec6vered, the petiBqner ®entitted to the saM amount. 3 However, jt e ppen to the respondents tp take recourse to F^ile 05 of the Chhatttsgartl Ciyjt^Servjc^ (Pensjon) Rytes, 1976, jf se advised, in accordance wnth taw, atto follovmg bSBic princjples of natural justic?.'':l::;::^ ' • '; • -—^—_-_ Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ashok