Allahabad High Court
Dharam Raj vs State Of U.P. Thru Addl Chief Secy. ... on 19 September, 2023
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:60112
Court No. - 20
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 6091 of 2023
Petitioner :- Dharam Raj
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Addl Chief Secy. Finance Civil Sectt. Lko And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohammad Ehtesham Khan
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel for opposite parties.
2. Petition has been filed challenging order dated 01.05.2023 whereby recovery has been directed from retiral benefits of petitioner.
3. On 21.08.2023, the following order had been passed:-
"1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties.
2. Petition has been filed challenging order dated 01.05.2023 whereby recovery has been made from retiral benefits of petitioner.
3. It has been submitted that earlier also in April 2022, the same amount had been withheld by the opposite parties on the ground of wrong fixation of grade pay with effect from 01.01.2006. The aforesaid orders were challenged before this Court in Writ A No.6535 of 2022 in which initially by means of order dated 29.09.2022, interim protection was granted to petitioner and subsequently the petition itself was allowed on 02.05.2023 which has become final since no Special Appeal has been preferred there against but despite the said facts, the impugned order has been passed again withholding the same amounts from pensionary benefits of petitioner.
4. Learned State counsel is granted a week's time to obtain instructions in this case.
5. List this case on 29.08.2023, as fresh."
4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that once the earlier judgment and order dated 02.05.2023 has become final quashing the earlier recovery of the same amount, it was not open for opposite parties to have again passed such a direction in the teeth of judgment rendered by this Court, especially since the said judgment had attained finality.
5. Learned State Counsel on the basis of written instructions dated 16.09.2023 submitted by the Chief Treasury Officer, Ayodhya, which is taken on record, has submitted that against the judgment and order dated 02.05.2023 passed in WRIT - A No. - 6535 of 2022, the State is contemplating filing of Special Appeal for which proceedings have been initiated.
6. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, it is evident that earlier by means of order dated 22.04.2022, recovery was sought to be made from retiral benefits of petitioner on account of fact that petitioner was incorrectly granted the Grade Pay of Rs.4800/- with effect from 01.01.2006 whereas he was entitled for Grade Pay of only Rs.4600/-. Aforesaid order was challenged by petitioner in WRIT - A No. - 6535 of 2022 which was allowed by means of judgment and order dated 02.05.2023 primarily on applicability of judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Rafiq Masih v. State of Punjab reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334 as well as fact that as on the date of grant of Grade Pay, no undertaking was given by petitioner. The petition was allowed and the recovery was set aside.
7. However, a day prior to allowing of earlier WRIT - A No. - 6535 of 2022, order dated 01.05.2023 has been passed by the Chief Treasury Officer which is impugned in this petition.
8. It is therefore quite evident that in earlier order of recovery dated 22.04.2022 and in the present impugned order dated 01.05.2023, the amount of recovery sought to be made amounting to Rs.2,57,012/- is the same and, therefore, once the aforesaid recovery has already been set aside by this Court vide judgment and order dated 02.05.2023, which as of now attained finaility, the present impugned order dated 01.05.2023 is also contrary to aforesaid judgment rendered by this Court.
9. In view of aforesaid, impugned recovery order dated 01.05.2023 being against the directions issued by this Court on 02.05.2023 passed in WRIT - A No. - 6535 of 2022 is quashed by issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari.
10. Resultantly, the petition succeeds and is allowed. A further writ in the nature of Mandamus is issued to opposite parties for payment of Rs.2,57,012/- along with arrears of salary and other consequential outstanding amount. The payment of same shall be made within a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before the concerned authority.
Order Date :- 19.9.2023
kvg/-
