Quashed

Raghavendra Kumar Rathore And Ors. v. State Of Chhattisgarh And Anr.

Chhattisgarh HC16 Mar 2022WPS/3753/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court ordered set-aside the impugned order dated 03.12.2011 for recovery of excess payment made to teachers as it was passed without issuing show cause notice or providing opportunity of hearing.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 03.12.2011 for recovery of excess payment set aside. Petitioners permitted to file representation before respondent-1 regarding weightage of increment.

Raghavendra Kumar Rathore And Ors. Vs State Of… — Service and Employment | Chhattisgarh HC (2022)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

WPS No. 3753 of 2012

¶4

Raghavendra Kumar Rathore, S/o Gopi Ram Rathore Aged About 39 Years Teacher Panchayay Middle School Lata, Block Katghora, Distt. Korba C.G

¶5

Smt. Vimla Rathore W/o Mohan La Rathore Aged About 42 Years Teacher Panchayat Middle School Lata, Block Katghora Distt. Korba C.G

¶6

Smt. Savita Pandey W/o R.K. Pandey Aged About 46 Years Teacher Panchayat Middle Schooltangamar, Block Katghora Distt. Korba C.G

¶7

Smt. Rukhmani Patkar W/o Ashok Kumar Patkar Aged About 40 Years Teacher Panchayat, Middle School, Syahimudi, , Block Katghora, Distt. Korba C.G

¶8

Smt. Shiv Gopal W/o Govind Gopal Aged About 43 Years Teacher Panchayat, Middle School, Tangamar, Block Katghora, Distt. Korba C.G

¶9

Smt. Kshama Vaishnav W/o D.K. Vaishnav Aged About 42 Years Teacher Panchayat, Middle School, Syahimudi, Block Katghora, Distt. Korba C.G

¶10

Jyoti Bhushan Singh Kanwar S/o Veer Singh Aged About 42 Years Teacher Panchayat, Middle School, Dhawarpur, Block Katghora, Distt. Korba C.G

¶11

Sanjiv Kumar Jaiswal S/o Krishna Lal Aged About 42 Years Teacher Panchayat, Middle School, Syhimudi, Block Katghora, Distt. Korba C.G

¶12

Smt. Jyoti Yadav W/o R.A. Yadav Aged About 44 Years Teacher Panchayat, Middle School, Bhadrapara, Block Katghora, Distt. Korba C.G

¶13

10.Smt. Asha Dubey W/o Ajay Dubey Aged About 38 Years Teacher Panchayat, Middle School, Lakhanpur, Block Katghora, Distt. Korba C.G

¶14

11.Smt. Meena Dhabu W/o V.P. Dhabu Aged About 46 Years Teacher Panchayat, Middle School, Lata, Block Katghora, Distt. Korba C.G

¶15

12.Smt. Uma Sahu D/o Moyhan Lal Sahu Aged About 43 Years Teacher Panchayat, Middle School, Tangamar, Block Katghora, Distt. Korba C.G

¶16

---- Petitioners

¶17

Versus

¶18

State Of Chhattisgarh, S/o Through The Secretary, Panchayat Deptt. Dks Bhawan Raipur C.G. , Chhattisgarh

¶19

Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat, Korba, Distt. Korba C.G. , District : Korba, Chhattisgarh

¶20

---- Respondents

¶21

For Petitioners : Shri Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate

¶22

For Respondents/State : Shri Sandeep Dubey, Dy AG

¶23

Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board

¶24

16.03.2022

¶25

Shri Ajay Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that respondent-2 had issued Annexure P1 order dated 03.12.2011, whereby it is ordered for recovery of excess payment. Before issuing Annexure P1 order,

¶26

Wps 3753 of 2012

¶27

¶28

or order dated 19.08.2011 referred in Annexure P1, no notice was served upon petitioners and impugned order has been passed without giving opportunity of hearing and therefore, it be set aside. He contended that some of other Shiksha Karmis also challenged recovery proceedings issued by the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Jilla Panchayat, Durg and CEO Janpad Panchayat, Dondi, before this Court in WPS-1352 of 2012 and WPS-1354 of 2012, which were partly allowed and order of recovery was set aside. Similar order may be passed in this case also, as respondent-2 has not issued any prior notice calling explanation and providing opportunity of hearing before passing an order for recovery of excess payment made to the petitioners. He contended that for the other relief, petitioners may be permitted to file representation before respondent-1.

¶29

Shri Sandeep Dubey, learned State counsel would submit that earlier, State Government ordered for fixation of pay granting weightage of increments considering length of service, vide order/circular dated 01.04.2007. That was clarified subsequently, vide notification dated 28.01.2012, hence, order Annexure P1 was issued. He also submits that in pursuance of policy decision taken by State Government, Shiksha Karmis, who completed 8 years of service as on July, 2018 have been absorbed in School Education Department. However, he does not dispute submission of learned counsel for the petitioners of passing order dated 18.08.2021 and 19.08.2021 in WPS-1352 of 2012 and WPS-1354 of 2012 respectively.

¶30

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused pleadings and documents placed on record.

¶31

In reply to Writ Petition, respondents have not filed any document or notice, if any, issued to petitioners before passing order Annexure P1 for

¶32

Wps 3753 of 2012

¶33

¶34

recovery of excess payment, made to the petitioners. Law with regard to recovery of any excess payment made to an employee is very much clear. Before issuing any order for recovery of excess payment, Show Cause Notice is required to be given enabling the persons/petitioners, to give explanation as to why excess amount paid be not recovered from them. Admittedly, respondent-2 has neither given Show Cause Notice, nor any opportunity of hearing, before issuing order Annexure P1 dated 03.12.2011.

¶35

For the foregoing, impugned order dated 03.12.2011 (Annexure P1) is set aside. CEO, Jilla Panchayat, Durg will be at liberty to proceed further in accordance with law.

¶36

Petitioners will be at liberty to file representation before respondent-1 with respect to prayer to grant benefit of weightage of increment in view of earlier Circular dated 18.04.2007 if any grievance still survives. If any such representation is filed before respondent-1, the same shall be decided in accordance with law, expeditiously.

¶37

Sd/(Parth Prateem Sahu) JUDGE

¶38

padma

Raghavendra Kumar Rathore And Ors. v. State Of Chhattisgarh And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raghavendra Kumar Rathore And Ors. v. State Of Chhattisgarh And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Peeli Bai Vs Director, Mohan Jute Mill p Ltd. and Ors.

Lalit Kumar Sahu Vs Municipal Corporation, Durg and Other

Kumari Bai Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Urmila Dhruw Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Samlal @ Shyamlal and Ors. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Sushant Chattar Vs State of Chhattisgarh