Smt. Geeta Khandey Vs State of Chhattisgarh

By the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking quashment of the impugned order dated 03/03/2026 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent No.5, whereby the petitioner was directed to deposit an amount of Rs. 1,32,570/-. The petitioner also sought a direction towards the respondents to grant final pension and gratuity.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the husband of the petitioner, while serving in the respondent department, died in harness on 28/11/2025. He submits that after the death of the deceased employee, during the process of settlement of death-cum-retiral benefits, the respondent authorities issued the impugned memo dated 03/03/2026 directing the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs.1,32,570/- on the allegation that during his tenure as In-charge Principal, the deceased employee had collected fees from the students but failed to deposit the same in the account of school. Learned counsel would submit that the impugned memo has been issued without conducting any proper enquiry and without following the due process of law or adhering to the principles of natural justice. He also submits that during the lifetime of the deceased employee, no notice whatsoever was issued to him regarding the alleged non-deposit of fees.

Per contra , learned counsel appearing for the State would oppose the aforesaid submission and submit that after verifying all the facts

3

and records, the impugned memo has been issued to the petitioner and as such, there is no illegality or irregularity.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the documents and the pleadings made by the petitioner.

In the case at hand, from perusal of the record, it appears that the authorities directed the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs.1,32,570/-, which is alleged to have been retained by the husband of the petitioner during his service tenure. However, the respondents have failed to place on record any material to demonstrate that any notice or opportunity of hearing was afforded either to the petitioner or to her husband prior to issuance of the impugned memo (Annexure P-1). Thus, the impugned memo, having been issued without following the due process of law and in violation of the principles of natural justice, is unsustainable in the eyes of law. Accordingly, the same deserves to be and is hereby quashed.

Consequently, the present writ petition stands allowed . The respondents are directed to refund the amount, if any, deposited by the petitioner pursuant to the impugned memo, forthwith. The respondent authorities are further directed to release all admissible death-cum-retiral benefits in favour of the petitioner in accordance with law.

(Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE

¶30

S. Bhilwar

Smt. Geeta Khandey v. State of Chhattisgarh