PETITIONER RESP9NDENTS / /’ \‘ 3 " “ MATHURA PRASAD SHARMA AGED ABOUT -— 65 YEAR$ .- W SON OF SHRI G. P. SHARMA RETIRED A. S. I. (M) FROM 0/0 DISTRICT MAGISTRATE / THE COLLECTOR, BILAsPUR (c. G.) R/o NEAR MATA CHOURA, KUDUDUND, BILASPUR (c. G.) VERSU$ 1.3TATE OF CHHATTISGARH, THROUGH ‘ THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME & POLICE, MANTRALAYA D. K. S. BHAWAN, RAIPUR, 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, BILASPUR (C. G.) 3. ACCOUNTANT GENERAL OF CHHAmSGARH (LEKHA & HAQDARI) DwmA, NIDHI —- 1o SITUATED AT iiANDARI, N'EAR Bus STANB, RAIPUR (c. G.) WRIT TITION UNDER ARTICLE a, 22$. & 2 7 F ON UT O F IA NATURE F AND s PROHiBlTlON EGTIONS O R R ERS. v "J OR l' F WRIT IN UITA LE DIRECTION OR IN THE HIGH (mum CFTJNDICATURC, AT-_B.lm$9umcna.) WRIT PETmoN No.37 ée 0F.2005 XI—HC-78 3a W, m,W 37é© Wm...n..?.u...u.u/W , CU. ‘ :2005\ \@ / WW(W) ‘Wwm WWW WW§WW WWW %3I%qan%$ 52—1-2006 Mr. RK. Keshar'wani, counsel for The pam‘ioner. Mr. Sufish Gupfa, Depu‘i’y Gavin Advoca‘re for The Sfafe/respondems No.1 & 2’ Mr. 5.K. BeriwaL Germ-a! 69w. Counse! for respondenf No.3. Heard. The main grievance 0f The ifioner‘ raised in fhié wrif pefi‘rion under- Am‘icles 226 & 227 of The Consfi u'Hon of indie is fha1' mega! recovery has been made from *he pefh‘ioner. The ease of fhe pe‘ri‘rioner i fhar he was appoinfed as A.5.I. (M) in fhe Poiice Depar‘l‘menf and affer comple ion of eligibie service, he refired on 31-12— 2000. The pefifioner had receive encashmen'i' of surrendered ieave of 217 days fram 1-9-1976 +0 1-9-1991 i fhe Tune of Rs.6,245/—, buf due fo audif objec‘i‘ion, *rhe same was recove from The pe‘l‘i'l'ioner agains‘r which ihe pei'ifioner moved fhe Sfafe Admini frai'ive Tribunal where fhe appiicaiion of fhe pei'ifioner was allowed and fhe er of fhe respondenfs was quashed. The pe'iiiioner was also granfed ad-hoc incremenf of Rs.70/- per moni'h for fhe periods from 1-4—1986 To 30-9- and from 1-10—2000 i0 31-12-2000, bui‘ The respondenTs have recovered Th above arrears amounTing To Rs.1,25,887/— and Rs.6,049/‘ respecTiveiy wiThouT cause and noTice. Learned counsei for The pe iTioner submiTs Tho? The said amounT was paid To The peTiTioner, as The peTi ianer was enTiTled for ad-hoc incremenT, however, The respondenTs have illeg iiy recovered The said amounT. Aggrieved by The said acTion of The responde Ts, The peTiTioner made represenTaTion To pi f r d 2 XI-HC-78 EW,WW,W WW a1 2005 WW(W) mam WWW WWEWW - $Wm Wwm -2" fhe Director Genera! of Police on 4—9—2001, buf fha'l' represenfafion has no‘l' been decided s0 far. Learned coun ei further submh‘s fha'r fhe peTi‘rioner was enfi‘Hed for- fhe ad-hoc incremem‘ f Rs‘7OI- per month in View of ihe order Annexure P—6 da‘red 4m July, 200 passed by The Finance Depar‘l’menf, and wi'fhouf considering Thaf, ‘rhe amou f has been recovered. Therefore, iearned counsel aiso submih‘ed +hwr fhe p fifioner may be aHowed +o make a fresh representa‘rian To respondent No.2 nd responden‘!‘ No.2 be direofed fo decide The represenfafion of fhe pe‘ri‘rione ‘l‘o which Mr. Gup‘i'a, Iearned Depui'y Govt Advocai-e for fhe Sfa‘re/responden No.1 & 2, has no objection. Having heard learned couns i for The parfies and having regard ‘l'o +he fac‘is and circumsfances of fhe case] ihe pe‘i’ifioner is aiiowed io make a defaiied represen‘ra‘rion annexing relevanf documen‘is and copy of ‘i'his pei‘ifion 'io responden'r No.2) and in Tum, respondeni- No.2 shali decide fhe represeniafion of fhe pei'i‘i‘ioner wii' din a period of Three mon‘ihs from ‘rhe dafe of ifs receip‘i‘ affer considering the poini's raised by fhe pe‘i'i‘i‘ioner in an objec‘i'ive manner, in accordance wi‘i'h law. Wi‘lh fhe direci'ion aforesaid fhe pe‘ri‘rion sfands disposed of. In view of fhis order, I.A.No 1080712005 also sfands disposed of. Parfies are eni‘ified for cer‘li fied copy of ihis order. I - Sd/- L.C.BHADOQ Judge