Smt. Geeta Devi Srivastav vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 8459 ALL

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 8459 ALL
Judgement Date : 22 July, 2021

Allahabad High Court

Smt. Geeta Devi Srivastav vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 22 July, 2021

Bench: Ashwani Kumar Mishra




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 33
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6945 of 2021
 

 
Petitioner :- Smt. Geeta Devi Srivastav
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sushil Kumar Tiwari
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

The petitioner has been superannuated from the post of Head Constable on 31.12.2020. The grievance is that the pay admissible to her, although was correctly noticed by the Superintendent of Police as Rs. 58,600/- in his communication dated 14.10.2020 in the payment pension order, but the pay has been unilaterally reduced to Rs. 55,200/-. It is also alleged that without passing any order and without affording any opportunity of hearing, alleged excess amount has also been recovered from the petitioner.

Submission is that the impugned action violates principles of natural justice and the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab and others vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and others; (2015) 4 SCC 334 has also not been considered.

Learned Standing Counsel has obtained instructions, according to which all dues have been paid to the petitioner and the excess amount of Rs. 3,75,945/- has been adjusted.

From the instructions received, it is apparent that no opportunity of hearing has been given to the petitioner before passing the order for reduction of petitioner's pay scale and effecting the deduction. Such order since carries civil consequences it cannot be passed unless an opportunity of hearing is given.

In such view of the matter, the order reducing petitioner's pay scale while sanctioning pension as well as consequential recovery cannot be sustained and are set aside. The authorities, however, will be at liberty to afford an opportunity of hearing in the matter to the petitioner and pass afresh order in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of presentation of a copy of this order. While taking appropriate decision, the authorities shall bear in mind the observations contained in the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Rafiq Masih (supra) as well as circulars issued by the department itself in compliance thereof.

The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed.

Order Date :- 22.7.2021

Pkb/