Disposed¶13

Rakesh Kumar Batham v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC12 Aug 2025WRIA/1164/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court (Court No. 5), WRIT - A No. 1164 of 2025, Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:137846, Saurabh Shyam Shamshery J., decided 13.8.2025. Retiral benefits/payment of retiral dues of retired employee; recovery of alleged excess payment made during service after retirement; Class IV employee; show-cause notice dated 17.05.2025 and reply dated 22.05.2025; writ petition disposed of with liberty to pass reasoned order; recovery dispute expressly not adjudicated.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; liberty granted to the respondents to pass a reasoned order on the recovery issue, taking note of legal and factual aspects. ¶13

Rakesh Kumar Batham Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:137846

¶2

Court No. - 5

¶3

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1164 of 2025

¶4

Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Batham Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manish Dev Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Saurabh Tiwari

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Manish Dev, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Saurabh Tiwari, learned counsel for respondent.

¶7

The petitioner has approached this Court that he is retired on 31.08.2024 and after his retirement, till date his retiral benefits has not been paid and he refers the documents annexed along with this writ petition i.e. retiral dues as calculated by respondent is Rs. 18,76,930/-.

¶8

Learned counsel for respondent submits that as per the recalculation, retiral dues is Rs.17,71,056/- as well as during service period some excess amount was also paid to petitioner i.e. about Rs.11,05,965/- and after retirement an amount of about Rs.8 lac was paid in installment i.e. on 04.05.2025, 30.03.2025 and on 06.05.2025.

¶9

Learned counsel for petitioner has not disputed that after filing this writ petition, the aforesaid amount is received in the bank account of petitioner. Learned counsel for petitioner further submits that excess amount if already paid, cannot be recovered by respondent after the retirement of petitioner i.e. a class IV employee.

¶10

At this stage, learned counsel for respondent has informed that a show-cause notice was issued on 17.05.2025 for recovery of excess amount paid, which was served upon petitioner and a reply thereof was submitted on 22.05.2025, however, petitioner has not instructed his counsel about said document.

¶11

I have considered the above submissions and perused the record.

¶12

According to respondent, entire retiral amount has been paid which has been substantially accepted by petitioner except the amount paid during his service period. Since the issue in regard to recovery, if any, is seized with concerned respondent,

¶13

therefore, the Court is not adjudicating said dispute at this stage and respondent have liberty to pass a reasoned order, taking note of legal and factual aspect. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 13.8.2025 P. Pandey

¶15

Digitally signed by :- PUSHPENDRA PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rakesh Kumar Batham v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Kumar Batham v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases