Sanjeev Shukla vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 21695 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:53136
 
Court No. - 20
 

 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5848 of 2023
 

 
Petitioner :- Sanjeev Shukla
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Smriti,Seema Kashyap
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

1. Heard Ms. Seema Kashyap and Ms. Smriti, learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel for opposite parties.

2. Petition has been filed seeking quashing of orders dated 24th March, 2023 and 25th May, 2023 whereby recovery has been directed from the dues of petitioner whose application for voluntary retirement has been accepted.

3. It has been submitted that a perusal of impugned orders makes it evident that no opportunity of hearing whatsoever has been provided to petitioner prior to passing of impugned orders, whereby recovery has been ordered only on the ground that excess payment of salary was made to petitioner on account of wrong fixation of salary. It is submitted that the impugned order is in violation of judgment rendered by the Apex Court in the case of State Of Punjab & Ors vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer); [(2015) 4 SCC 334].

4. Learned State Counsel appearing for opposite parties has, on the other hand, submitted that opposite party was well within their discretion to pass impugned orders for recovery since excess payment of salary had been paid to petitioner.

5. Considering submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioner and upon perusal of material on record, it is quite evident that impugned orders do not indicate any notice having been issued to petitioner prior to passing of impugned recovery orders. The orders impugned also do not indicate any complicity of petitioner in wrong fixation of pay scale or an excess payment of salary being made to him. The order also does not indicate any reason for excess payment of salary to petitioner. The order, as such, clearly is in violation of judgement rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Rafiq Masih (White Washer) (supra)

6. In view of aforesaid, the impugned orders dated 24th March, 2023 and 25th May, 2023 are quashed by issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari granting liberty to opposite parties to pass fresh orders pertaining to petitioner but only after affording opportunity of hearing and considering his reply.

7. The petition, as such, is allowed at the admission stage itself.

Order Date :- 10.8.2023

Arnima