The court allowed a writ petition challenging notices/orders regarding recovery of excess pension payments made to a retired employee. The court quashed the impugned orders, allowing recovery of actual excess amounts based on entitlement.
Impugned notices/orders dated 08.03.2021, 11.06.2021 and 22.07.2022 are quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 36
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15548 of 2022
Petitioner :- Ram Chandra Maurya Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rishu Mishra,Pankaj Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Rajan Upadhyay
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Order Date :- 7.12.2022 Abhilash
Digitally signed by ABHILASH SINGH Date: 2022.12.07 16:01:30 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether impugned notices/porters related to recovery of excess pension can be challenged via writ petition.
Whether the claim of computational error justifying recovery of excess pension warrants quashing of notice.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Punjab & Ors. Vs. Rafiq MasihReferred¶7
State of Punjab & Ors. Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) & Ors., (2015) 4 SCC 334 · Who else cites this
Ram Chandra Maurya
State Of U.P.
Other 1
Other 2
Saumitra Dayal Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
