REETA KURRE Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not challenging the order dated 27-2-2009 (Annexure P-l) to the effect of discounting the grant of benefit of Kramonnati, however,the payment whatsoever has been made to the petitioner on account of Kramonnati granted to the petitioner by the respondent authorities the same may not be recovered. Learned Counsel further submits that the petitioner was not granted the benefit of Kramonnati on account of misrepresentation or fraud committed by him. The said benefit was granted to the petitioner by the respondent authorities after having considered all the aspects of the case of the petitioner in its letter and spirit.

(2.) Per contra, Shri Moorthy, learned Deputy Advocate General for the state submits that the benefit of Kramonnati has wrongly been granted to the petitioner and after knowing about the said mistake the impugned order was rightly passed. Thus, the petitioner is not entitled to any relief.

(3.) I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties, perused the pleadings and the document appended thereto.