Raghuvar Dayal vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 7999 MP

                                                         1                             WP-25284-2021
                              The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                       WP No. 25284 of 2021
                                 (RAGHUVAR DAYAL Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)


                      Jabalpur, Dated : 30-11-2021
                            Ms. Sonal Patidar, learned counsel for petitioner.

                            Shri Swapnil Naolekar, learned Panel Lawyer for respondent/State.

Petitioner has filed this petition challenging part of order dated 26.11.2020 (Annexure-P/2) i.e. clause (2). By said order, direction was issued to recover an amount of Rs.4,54,691/- from gratuity amount of petitioner.

Counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that petitioner is a Class-III government employee and recovery can not be made from a retired Class-III employee as per the judgment of Apex Court passed in case of State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) etc., (2015) 4 SCC

334. It is further submitted that no show cause notice was issued before passing of impugned order. Recovery from petitioner is not permissible as per Para 18(i), (ii) and (iii) of the judgment passed in case of State of Punjab and others (supra). It is submitted that case of petitioner is squarely covered by said judgment. Counsel for petitioner is praying for quashing of part of

order dated 26.11.2020 i.e. clause (2) on the ground that same is contrary and pay the gratuity amount to petitioner with interest.

Panel Lawyer appearing for State opposed the prayer of petitioner and submitted that amount can be recovered from petitioner.

Heard the counsel for the parties.

Considering the judgment passed by Apex Court in case of State of Punjab and others (supra), it is found that case of petitioner is covered by aforesaid judgment. In view of same, recovery in respect of clause (2) i.e. Rs.4,54,691/- along with interest from gratuity amount is quashed. Petitioner is directed to pay the gratuity amount. No order is passed in respect of clause (1) and (3) as no relief is prayed for the same.

In view of aforesaid, writ petition is disposed off.

Signature Not
 SAN
Verified                    C.C. as per rules.
Digitally signed by
SUNIL KUMAR
PATEL
Date: 2021.12.02
10:34:36 IST
                              2          WP-25284-2021
                                 (VISHAL DHAGAT)
                                      JUDGE
                      sp/-




Signature
 SAN      Not
Verified

Digitally signed by
SUNIL KUMAR
PATEL
Date: 2021.12.02
10:34:36 IST