Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 13149 MP
Judgement Date : 14 August, 2023
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA
PRADESH
AT GWALIOR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANAND PATHAK
ON THE 14 th OF AUGUST, 2023
WRIT PETITION No. 3317 of 2018
BETWEEN:-
SMT. MANRANJAN KAUR BATRA W/O SHRI
SARDAR DILEEP SINGH BATRA, AGED 63 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: PENSIONER (RETIRED FROM
UPPER DIVISION TEACHER) R/O MAHAVIR NAGAR
COLONY GURUDWAR KE PICHHE SHIVPURI,
DISTRICT SHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI NEERAJ SHRIVASTAVA- ADVOCATE)
AND
1. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, GOVT. OF
M.P. VALLABH BHAWAN, BHOPAL (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. ZILA SHIKSHA ADHIKARI EDUCATION
D E P A R T M E N T SHIVPURI (MADHYA
PRADESH)
3. URBAN ADMINISTRATION AND
DEVELOPMENT GWALIOR EVAM CHAMBAL
S A M B H A G MOTI MAHAL GWALIOR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. ZILA PENSION ADHIKARI DISTRICT
SHIVPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)
5. ZILA KOSHALAYA ADHIKARI ZILA
KOSHALAYA ADHIKARI SHIVPURI DISTRICT
SHVIPURI (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VISHAL
UPADHYAY
Signing time: 8/16/2023
11:26:18 AM
2
6. SANKUL PRABHARI/ PRACHARYA
EDUCATION DEPARTMENT SHASKIYA
UCHATAR MADHYAMIK VIDHYALAYA NO. 2,
SHIVPURI, DISTRICT SHIVPURI (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI NILESH TOMAR- GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR
RESPONDENT/STATE.)
This petition coming on for admission this day, the court passed
the following:
ORDER
The present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking following relief:-
" 7-1 fiVh'kuj dh fiVh'ku dks Lohdkj djrs gq, mldks iznku fd;s x;s lsokfgr ykHkksas es ls vf/kd Hkqxrku dh olwyh :i;s 2]19]189@& ¼nks yk[k mUuhl gtkj ,d lkS uoklh :i;s½ dks ekuuh; U;k;ky; }kjk fn;s x;s leku fn'kk funZs'kksa ds dze esa lekurk ls C;kt lfgr 30 fnol esa Hkqxrku dj okfil iznku fd;s tkus ds funsZ'k& vkns'k jsLiksaMsaV~l foHkkxh; izkf/kdkfj;ks dks iznku djus dh d`ik U;k;fgr esa djsA 7-2 vU; mfpr fjV] vkns'k vFkok funZs'k U;k;kfgr es fiVh'kuj ds i{k esa tkjh djus dh d`ik djsa] izdj.k O;; jsLiksaMsaV~l fnyk;s tkus fd d`ik djsaA^^
It is the submission of learned counsel for petitioner that petitioner was working as Upper Division Teacher (U.D.T.) at a relevant point of time and due to attainment of first and second Kramonnati, she was given payment which was excess in nature contrary to the increment which she deserved. However, due to error in calculation, said amount has been disbursed in which neither petitioner made any misrepresentation, nor she gave any undertaking, so as to attract recovery. Learned counsel for
Signature Not Verified Signed by: VISHAL UPADHYAY Signing time: 8/16/2023 11:26:18 AM
petitioner relied upon the Judgment of Apex Court in the cases of State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer), 2015 (1), MPHT 130 (SC) Para11, Thomas Deniel Vs. State of Kerala and others 2022 SCC Online SC 536 and High Court of Punjab and Haryana & others Vs. Jagdev Singh reported in 2016 SCC Online SC 748 and sought parity.
Learned counsel for respondent/State opposed the prayer and submitted that due to calculation mistake, some extra benefits were given to the petitioner which were not legitimately payable to her. Therefore the said amount has been recovered. There is no arbitrariness or illegality.
Heard counsel for the rival parties and perused the documents appended thereto.
This is a case where petitioner, a lady aged 63 years, was a UDT at the relevant point of time and she got increments due to kramonnati. Therefore, any benefits extended to her were not because of misrepresentation of petitioner or concealment of any facts.
In the case of Rafiq Masih (supra), Thomas Daniel (Supra) and Jagdev Singh (supra), it has been held that if petitioner does not misrepresent and has not given any undertaking, then no recovery can be issued against her. Here, in the present case, respondents failed to refer any undertaking given by petitioner. Similarly, petitioner did not misrepresent and was not instrumental in concealment of any facts.
Therefore, the instant petition stands allowed and impugned order dated 26.09.2017 (Annexure P/1) is set aside. Since recovery has already been
Signature Not Verified Signed by: VISHAL UPADHYAY Signing time: 8/16/2023 11:26:18 AM
made by the respondents, therefore, recovered amount be returned back to the petitioner within a period of four months.
(ANAND PATHAK) JUDGE Vishal
Signature Not Verified Signed by: VISHAL UPADHYAY Signing time: 8/16/2023 11:26:18 AM
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!