[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Manipur High Court
Kh Puspalata Devi vs State Of Manipur And 3 Ors on 9 March, 2026
Author: A. Guneshwar Sharma
Bench: A. Guneshwar Sharma
Item no. 22-82
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR
AT IMPHAL
W.P. (C) No. 331 of 2023 with MC(W.P. (C)) No. 157 of 2024 with
MC(W.P. (C)) No. 189 of 2024 with W.P. (C) No. 1045 of 2022 with
W.P. (C) No. 1046 of 2022 with W.P. (C) No. 1068 of 2022 with
W.P. (C) No. 1080 of 2022 with W.P. (C) No. 13 of 2024 with
W.P. (C) No. 14 of 2024 with W.P. (C) No. 15 of 2024 with
W.P. (C) No. 18 of 2023 with
W.P. (C) No. 188 of 2024 with W.P. (C) No. 201 of 2024 with
W.P. (C) No. 225 of 2024 with W.P. (C) No. 231 of 2024 with
W.P. (C) No. 235 of 2018 with W.P. (C) No. 276 of 2024 with
W.P. (C) No. 296 of 2024 with W.P. (C) No. 329 of 2023 with
W.P. (C) No. 330 of 2023 with W.P. (C) No. 332 of 2023 with
W.P. (C) No. 333 of 2023 with W.P. (C) No. 349 of 2023 with
W.P. (C) No. 457 of 2024 with
W.P. (C) No. 462 of 2024 with W.P. (C) No. 463 of 2024 with
W.P. (C) No. 478 of 2023 with W.P. (C) No. 479 of 2023 with
W.P. (C) No. 505 of 2024 with W.P. (C) No. 506 of 2023 with
W.P. (C) No. 506 of 2024 with W.P. (C) No. 507 of 2023 with
W.P. (C) No. 508 of 2023 with W.P. (C) No. 509 of 2023 with
W.P. (C) No. 511 of 2024 with W.P. (C) No. 51 of 2021 with
W.P. (C) No. 513 of 2024 with W.P. (C) No. 517 of 2024 with
W.P. (C) No. 620 of 2019 with W.P. (C) No. 626 of 2024 with
W.P. (C) No. 629 of 2024 with W.P. (C) No. 660 of 2023 with
W.P. (C) No. 662 of 2024 with W.P. (C) No. 67 of 2023 with
W.P. (C) No. 688 of 2018 with W.P. (C) No. 690 of 2018 with
W.P. (C) No. 749 of 2023 with W.P. (C) No. 764 of 2022 with
W.P. (C) No. 765 of 2022 with W.P. (C) No. 766 of 2022 with
W.P. (C) No. 788 of 2022 with W.P. (C) No. 847 of 2023 with
W.P. (C) No. 863 of 2023 with W.P. (C) No. 864 of 2023 with
W.P. (C) No. 868 of 2023 with
W.P. (C) No. 87 of 2024 with W.P. (C) No. 88 of 2024 with
W.P. (C) No. 89 of 2024 with W.P. (C) No. 90 of 2024 with
W.P. (C) No. 928 of 2023 with W.P. (C) No. 96 of 2024
Kh Puspalata Devi
... Petitioner
- Versus -
State of Manipur and 3 Ors.
... Respondents
B E F O R E
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA
ORDER
09.03.2026
[1] Present Mr. M. Rendy, learned counsel; Mr. Kh. Tarunkumar,
learned sr. counsel along with Ms. Kh. Maria, learned counsel; Mr. Ch.
Robinchandra, learned counsel; Ms. Malemleima, learned counsel; Mr. R.K.
Deepak, learned sr. counsel; Mr. L. Raju, learned counsel for some the
petitioners; Mrs. Ch. Sundari, learned GA & Mr. S. Niranjan, learned GA for the
State respondents and Mr. S. Suresh, learned counsel & Mr. S. Jasobanta,
learned counsel for the Principal Accountant General, Manipur.
[2] On 22.08.2025, this Court framed 5 propositions in this batch of
writ petitions and the relevant para no. 2 is reproduced below:
"[2] After considering the preliminary submissions made by the
learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the materials on
record, this Court framed the following propositions in the present
batch of writ petitions:
(i) Whether recovery of excess payment can be made
from retired Group C & D (Class-III & IV) employees?
(ii) Is there any exception for recovery of excess payment
from the retired Group C & D (Class-III & IV)
employee?
(iii) What are the conditions for recovery of excess
payment made from any other employees (apart from
Group C & D) after retirement?
(iv) Whether misrepresentation, fraud and collusion be a
ground for recovery of excess payment for any retired
Government employee?
(v) Whether it is mandatory to issue show cause notice
before recovery of the excess payment from any
retired employee?"
[3] During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the
respondents has pointed out that in the 5 propositions framed by this Court in
order dated 22.08.2025, the most important issue raised by the respondents is
that the employees at the time of availing the benefit of higher pay/ allowance,
the employees have given written consent for recovery, if any, in case of excess
payment and this main issue is missing in the propositions framed by this Court.
An additional proposition be added in continuation to earlier propositions framed
by order dated 22.08.2025. In the circumstances, an additional proposition is
framed in continuation of the earlier order dated 22.08.2025 as "(vi) Whether
recovery of excess payment be made from the employees (both serving and
retired) as they have already given consent for the same?".
[4] List these cases on 06.04.2026 for further hearing.
JUDGE
OINAM Digitally signed by
OINAM THOIBA
THOIBA MEITEI
Date: 2026.03.10
MEITEI 10:52:54 +05'30'
Thoiba
