Madhya Pradesh High Court
Veerandra Kuamr Rajak vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 1 October, 2021
Author: Vishal Mishra
1 WP-20228-2021
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
WP-20228-2021
(VEERANDRA KUAMR RAJAK Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)
Jabalpur, Dated : 01-10-2021
Heard through Video Conferencing.
Shri Sachin Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Manoj Kushwaha, learned PL for respondent -State.
The present petition is filed seeking the following reliefs :-
1. Call for relevant records pertaining to the case of the petitioner for
bare perusal of this Honble Court,
2. Refund back the amount of recovery Rs.1,30,697=00 which has
been recovered from pension retiral dues of the petitioner.
3. Any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble court may
deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case including cost
of the litigation may kindly be awarded in favour of the petitioner.
It is submitted that the petitioner is already a contingency paid
employee and in pursuance to the same, he was entitled for the Kramonnati
benefits. The same was extended to him and now by the impugned order,
the recovery has been initiated against the petitioner.
It is submitted that the recovery is contrary to the judgment passed by
the Division Bench of this court in W.A. No. 598/2021, decided on 8.9.2021
and subsequently by this court in W.P. No.12190/2019, decided on
28.9.2021 considering the case of Man Singh Thakur Vs. State of M.P. and
others (W.P. No. 5277/2014, decided on 17.4.2014) and K.L. Asre Vs. State
of M.P. and others (W.P. No. 1070/2003), decided on 7.11.2005 and Tejulal
Yadav Vs. State of M.P. and others (W.P. No.11507/2007, decided on
23.01.2009.
It is submitted that no recovery can be made from the petitioner as
settled principle of law by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab
Vs. Rafiq Masih, (20214) 8 SCC 883. In such circumstances, the recovery
Signature Not
SAN
Verified order is illegal and is prayer is made to quash the same.
Digitally signed by
BASANT KUMAR
SHRIVAS
Date: 2021.10.02
12:25:30 IST
2 WP-20228-2021
Counsel appearing for the State does not dispute this fact that the
matter is squarely covered by the by the judgments of this court, as pointed
out hereinabove. He fairly submits that the petitioner may file a detailed
representation to the respondents - authorities and the same will considered
and decided within a short period considering the judgements passed by this
court.
Prayer appears to be reasonable.
In such circumstances, this petition is disposed of directing the
petitioner to file a fresh representation before the respondents - authorities
alongwith all the judgments and orders passed by this court and the
Divisional District Pension Officer, Mandla, District Mandla and Sub
Divisional Officer, (Agricultural) Farmer Welfare, Mandla, district Mandla
are directed to dwell upon the same within a period of two months from the
date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Needless to say that as the controversy has already been settled, the
recovery orders dated 8.6.2021, (Ann. P-1) and 9.7.2020, (Ann. P-2) are
quashed.
The authorities are directed to re-examine the case of the petitioner
and pass fresh order, as pointed out herein above.
If the authorities arrive at a conclusion that the petitioner is entitled to
the relief as claimed by him, the amount so recovered be refunded back to
the petitioner.
The petition is disposed of.
VISHAL MISHRA)
JUDGE
bks
Signature
SAN Not
Verified
Digitally signed by
BASANT KUMAR
SHRIVAS
Date: 2021.10.02
12:25:30 IST
