Court No. - 5
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 14273 of 2021 Petitioner :- Daya Shankar Respondent :- State Of U.P. Through Secretary And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Madhu Ranjan Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Amit Shukla
Hon'ble Saral Srivastava,J.
Order impugned dated 14.7.2021 passed by the District Basic Education Officer, District Pilibhit is assailed on the ground that the recovery on account of payment of excess salary between December, 2008 to June, 2019 is being made on the ground that the petitioner's salary was incorrectly fixed. It is submitted that such unilateral decision is without affording any opportunity of hearing to petitioner and is otherwise based on incorrect facts.
Reliance is placed upon a judgment and order of the Apex Court in State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih (white washer) and others, 2015 (4) SCC 334, to submit that after retirement no deduction is otherwise permissible from the petitioner's retiral benefits.
Sri Amit Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent nos. 2 to 4 as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State does not dispute that an opportunity of hearing has not been given to petitioner in the matter.
The order directing recovery to be made from the salary of an employee is an order carrying civil consequences and can be passed only after affording of an opportunity of hearing to the employee and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Rafiq Masih (white washer) (supra) ought to be considered before passing such order.
In that view of the matter, this petition stands disposed off by permitting the petitioner to represent his grievance before the respondent no.2, annexing all materials in support of his claim alongwith copy of this order within a period of two weeks from today. The concerned authority shall furnish details and thereafter petitioner shall be at liberty to make a detail representation which shall be examined by the authority concerned, keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in Rafiq Masih (white washer) (supra) by passing a fresh order within a further period of three months, thereafter. No recovery shall be made from the petitioner and the parties shall abide by the fresh order to be passed by the authority concerned in view of the above directions.
Order Date :- 25.10.2021/Sattyarth