Uttarakhand High Court

WPSS/775/2025 on 13 May, 2025

Author: Ravindra Maithani

Bench: Ravindra Maithani

              Office Notes,
       Date      reports,
                orders or                  COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
              proceedings
              or directions
                   and
               Registrar's
               order with
               Signatures
D/11                          WPSS No.775 of 2025
                              Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J.

Mr. Anil K. Bisht, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Rajeev Singh Bisht, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State/respondents.

The petitioner claims that after retirement, the respondent no.4/ the Treasury Officer, Rudraprayag had recovered Rs.7,06,907/- from the gratuity amount of the petitioner. Heard.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that recovery may not be made in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab and others vs. Rafiq Masih, (2015)4 SCC, 334, that recovery from retired Government Servant may not be made, unless there are serious allegations of misrepresentation and/or fraud, etc?

It is also submitted that similar controversy has already been decided by this Court in WPSS No.1387 of 2017, Vinod Kumar (deceased) vs. State of Uttarakhand and others, and connected cases on 02.01.2024.

The question is, why and under what circumstances, recovery may be made from gratuity and post retirement dues especially, in view of the fact that the petitioner did not make any misrepresentation or he has not played any fraud in receiving the amount, which was allegedly recovered from the gratuity, when the Court posed this question, learned State counsel seeks time to get instructions.

List on 21.05.2025.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 13.05.2025 Sanjay