Mahesh Kumar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5995 MP

                                 1




        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                          AT INDORE
                             BEFORE
             HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA

                    ON THE 23rd OF APRIL, 2022




                 WRIT PETITION No. 6606 of 2022


     Between:-

     MAHESH KUMAR S/O DAL CHAND GURHE , AGED ABOUT 52
     YEARS, OCCUPATION: HEAD CONSTABLE 245, ALOK DHAM,
     NEAR SAI MANDIR (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                 .....PETITIONER

     (BY SHRI ABHISHEK JAIN, ADVOCATE )

     AND

   THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
1.
   VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
   THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE UJJAIN (MADHYA
2.
   PRADESH)
                                             .....RESPONDENTS

     (BY SHRI P. KIBE, PANEL LAWYER)



        This petition coming on for admission this day, the Court

passed the following:
                                   2

                             ORDER

1. The petitioner before this Court has filed this present petition being aggrieved by the order dated 14/02/2022 passed by the respondent No.2.

2. The petitioner's contention is that an order of recovery was issued against the petitioner directing recovery. Now the respondents are recovering the interest also on excess amount paid to the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court towards the judgment delivered in the case of Rajendra Bhawsar V/s The State of Madhya Pradesh & Others (W.P. No.826/2017) and the co-ordinate Bench of this Court has quashed the recovery in respect of the interest component only. A Writ Appeal was also preferred in the matter i.e. W.A. No.120/2018 (The State of Madhya Pradesh & Others v/s Rajendra Bhawsar) and the Division Bench of this Court has upheld the judgment delivered by the learned Single Judge, meaning thereby, the recovery in respect of the interest component has been quashed.

4. Learned Government Advocate for the respondents/State has not disputed the aforesaid facts.

5. This Court, after hearing learned counsel for the parties is of the considered opinion that the present writ petition deserves to be allowed and is accordingly, partly allowed. The respondents shall

be free to recover the principal amount. It is further made clear that there will be no recovery in respect of the interest component. In case, the petitioner attains the age of superannuation, the respondents shall be free to recover the amount from his terminal dues.

6. With the aforesaid, the present Writ Petition stands partly allowed.

C.C. as per rules.

(Pranay Verma) Judge

Aiyer* Digitally signed by JAGDISHAN AIYER Date: 2022.04.29 14:20:28 +05'30'