Smt Suman Yadav vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 229 MP

   :1:                                   W.P. No.4029-2021


THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH: BENCH AT INDORE


                          W.P. No.4029-2021
          (Smt. Suman Yadav vs. State of M.P. and others)
Indore, Dated: 10.2.2021
          Shri Subhash Sen, learned counsel for the petitioner.
          Shri Nipun Choudhary, learned Panel Lawyer for the
respondents/State.

Heard on the question of admission.

By this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the calculation sheet for recovery from her with interest issued by the respondents vide order dated 5.11.2020.

The petitioenr is not challenging the recovery of excess amount paid to her but she is challenging the recovery of interest.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that identical writ petition bearing No.10915/2020 in the case of Kailash Goyal vs. State of M.P. and three others has been disposed of by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.10.2020 by issuing certain direction.

Learned counsel for the respondent/State has not disputed the same and has prayed for similar direction.

The co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Kailash Goyal vs. State of M.P. and three others (supra) has held as under:-

"Parties through their counsel.

The petitioner before this Court has filed this present petition stating that he was appointed as Assistant Sub Inspector (M) in the police department on 03.07.1982 and he has attained the age of super annuation on 01.10.2018 (sought voluntary retirement). The petitioner's grievance is that after retirement, the :2: W.P. No.4029-2021

respondents have effected recovery, which is as under:

(1) Rs.4,75,958/- and interest on this amount is Rs.6,42,122/-.

(2) Rs.1,48,682/- and interest on this amount is Rs.47,332/-.

Learned counsel has argued before this Court that in similar circumstances, a large number of writ petitions have allowed by this Court and the interest component has been quashed keeping in view the judgment delivered by the Division Bench in W.A. No.120/2008 (State of Madhya Pradesh and others Vs. Rajendra Bhawsar) decided on 06.08.2018.

The aforesaid judgment has not been disputed by the learned government advocate and in the aforesaid case the interest component was quashed by the learned Single Judge,which has been affirmed by the Division Bench in similar circumstances.

Resultantly, after hearing the learned government advocate and after going through the record, the present writ petition is partly. The recovery against the petitioner is upheld, however, the interest component is hereby quashed. The interest component recovered from the petitioner be refunded back to the petitioner within a period of 30 daysfrom the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

With the aforesaid, present petition stands partly allowed."

Having regard to the aforesaid and undisputed position that the case of the petitioner stands on the same footing, the present writ petition is also disposed of by holding that the direction issued in the case of Kailash Goyal (supra) will apply mutatis mutandis in the present case also.

Certified copy, as per rules.

(Subodh Abhyankar) Judge krjoshi Digitally signed by KHEMRAJ JOSHI Date: 2021.02.25 17:37:43 +05'30'