Smt. Jyoti Rai vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 4969 Chatt

                                            1

                   HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                  WPS No. 5244 of 2022
  Smt. Jyoti Rai W/o Shankar Rai Aged About 61 Years Poster Nursing Sister, Civil
   Hospital Mana, Raipur R/o Q.No. 23, Mana New Market, District Raipur Chhattisgarh.
                                                                            ---- Petitioner
                                         Versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Principal Secretary, Health And Family Welfare And
   Medical Education Officer At So-10, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhavan, Nava Raipur Atal
   Nagar, Chhattisgarh.
2. Principal Secretary, Department Of Finance, Mahanadi Bhavan, Atal Nagar,
   Raipur,chhattisgarh.
3. Block Education Officer, Dharsiva Raipur District Chhattisgarh.
4. The Joint Director, Treasury Accounts And Pension, Raipur Chhattisgarh.
                                                                       ---- Respondents

7-

03-08-2022 Mr. Akash Kumar Kundu, counsel for the petitioner.

Mr. Subham Verma, PL for the State.

Heard on I. A. No.1, which is an application for grant of interim relief.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner who was working as Staff Nurse was given three or four increments on the basis that she is holding decree or diploma at the time of initial appointment. This grant of three or four increments was continued even after re-organization of the State of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. Thereafter, all of a sudden respondent authority issued a recovery order dated 25-7-2022 (Annexure P/1) recovering the amount which has been paid by the State treating as excess payment. He would further submit that the recovery order issued by the respondent authority is against the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) reported in 2015 (4) SCC 334 and Thomas Daniel

Vs. State of Kerala, Civil Appeal No 7115 of 2010, decided on 2-5-2022 wherein Hon'ble the Supreme Court has considered the issue and stayed the recovery proceedings.

In the light of aforesaid judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court, recovery so far as it relates to the petitioner shall remain stayed, till the next date of hearing.

List this case on 12-10-2022.

In view of the above, I.A.No.1 is allowed. Meanwhile, State counsel is directed to file reply and also counter affidavit wherein they will narrate the factual matrix whether the grant of three or four increments can be recovered retrospectively when the amount has been paid by the State itself as per policy which was prevailing in the year 1985 and whether this circular/policy can be withdrawn retrospectively or not.

Let the counter affidavit should consist of query raised by this court in foregoing paragraph.

Sd/-

(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge

amita