Narendra Prasad Dubey Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2025)

Narendra Prasad Dubey Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition allowed; impugned order dated 30.07.2024 quashed by certiorari with liberty to the authority to pass fresh pay-fixation orders only after hearing the petitioner and considering his reply, within eight weeks, keeping the Rafiq Masih directions in view, and considering refund of the recovery already made.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 30.07.2024 directing recovery of salary from the petitioner (a Class III employee) for alleged excess payment made from January, 2006 to June, 2024, passed without affording an opportunity of hearing, is sustainable in law.

Court's answer

The impugned order effected re-fixation of the petitioner's pay with effect from January, 2006 along with directions for recovery, but prior to its passing no opportunity of hearing had been afforded to the petitioner.

Ratio / Principle

Applying State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih (2015) 4 SCC 334, recovery cannot be effected from the salary of Class III and Class IV employees where there is no allegation of fraud or misrepresentation on the part of the employee.

Key takeaways

The impugned order dated 30.07.2024 was quashed by issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari, with liberty granted to the authority concerned to pass fresh orders regarding pay-fixation only after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and considering his reply, keeping in mind the directions in State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih.ratio¶7
The fresh decision is to be taken by the authority within a period of eight weeks, and the aspect of refund of the recovery already made from the petitioner's salary is also to be considered by the authority in the same order, in light of State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih.ratio¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Service Law / Recovery of excess salary — Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenged order dated 30.07.2024 whereby recovery was directed from the salary of a Class III employee on the ground of excess payment of salary from January, 2006 till June, 2024. The Court found that the order effected re-fixation of pay with effect from January, 2006 along with recovery directions, but was passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Following State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih (2015) 4 SCC 334, which holds that recovery cannot be effected from the salaries of Class III and Class IV employees absent fraud or misrepresentation, the Court quashed the impugned order by a writ of Certiorari, granted liberty to the authority to pass fresh orders on pay-fixation only after hearing the petitioner and considering his reply in light of Rafiq Masih, set an eight-week timeline, and directed that the refund of the recovery already made also be considered in the same order. Petition allowed.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:45912

Court No. - 8

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8550 of 2025

Petitioner :- Narendra Prasad Dubey Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Ayush Anubhag-1 Lko. And 2 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohammad Tauseef Siddiqui,Shiv Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties.

Present petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed challenging order dated 30.07.2024 whereby recovery from salary of petitioner has been directed to be effected on ground that excess payment of salary was made to petitioner since January, 2006 till June, 2024.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is currently employed as a Class III employee and by means of impugned order, recovery has been effected without affording him any opportunity of hearing, for benefits which petitioner has been drawing for the past twenty years. It is submitted that impugned order does not indicate any complicity or misrepresentation on part of petitioner in the alleged excess payment of salary. He has relied upon judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Punjab & others v. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) & others reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334.

Learned State Counsel has not been provided written instructions in this matter but submits that impugned order has been passed in view of fact that due to some error, excess payment has been made to petitioner.

Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, it is evident from a perusal of impugned order dated 30.07.2024 that re-fixation of pay of petitioner with effect from January, 2006 has been effected along with directions for recovery but it is also evident that prior to passing of impugned order, no opportunity of hearing has been provided to petitioner.

Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Punjab & others v. Rafiq Masih (supra) has clearly enunciated that recovery cannot be effected from salary of Class III and Class IV employees particularly when there is no allegation of any fraud or misrepresentation on

part of the employee.

In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances, impugned order dated 30.07.2024 is hereby quashed by issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari granting liberty to authority concerned to pass orders afresh regarding pay-fixation but only after affording opportunity of hearing to petitioner and considering his reply. Aforesaid exercise shall keep in mind directions issued by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Punjab & others v. Rafiq Masih (supra). Such a decision shall be taken within a period of eight weeks. The aspect of refund of recovery made from petitioner's salary shall also be considered by the authority by the same order in light of State of Punjab & others v. Rafiq Masih (supra) .

Resultantly, the petition succeeds and is allowed.

Order Date :- 7.8.2025 kvg/-

Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench