Shoorveer Singh Gusain vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 2758 UK

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 2758 UK
Judgement Date : 2 August, 2021

Uttarakhand High Court

Shoorveer Singh Gusain vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 2 August, 2021

       HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

                   Writ Petition (S/S) No. 943 of 2021

Shoorveer Singh Gusain                                      ........... Petitioner

                                       Vs.

State of Uttarakhand and others                            ........ Respondents


Mr. Amit Kapri, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Sushil Vasistha, Standing Counsel for the State/respondents.




                                 JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The petitioner seeks that the recovery of `4,25,331/-, as initiated by the respondents from the petitioner be quashed.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner retired from the services of the respondents in the year 2012. After a lapse of about 10 years, the respondents have initiated recovery of `4,25,331/- from the petitioner claiming that this has been an amount paid in excess to the petitioner.

4. The Court wanted to know from the learned counsel for the petitioner, as to why the petition be entertained in view of the existence of the State Public Services Tribunal, as constituted under the Uttar Pradesh Services (Tribunal) Act, 1976.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that a direction may be issued to the respondents to decide the representation dated 15.01.2021 (Annexure No.7 to the writ petition), submitted by the petitioner.

6. On behalf of the State, a submission is given that the representation dated 15.01.2021 (Annexure No.7 to the writ petition) will be decided by the respondents within a period of two months from today.

7. The Court takes on record the statement given by the learned State counsel.

8. The writ petition is disposed of with the directions to the respondents, to decide the representation dated 15.01.2021 (Annexure No.7 to the writ petition) within a period of two months from today. But, in case the dispute is still not resolved, even after consideration of the representation, any writ petition, on the subject, shall not be entertained by this Court merely on the ground that it is in sequel to the instant writ petition.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 02.08.2021 Sanjay