CHHOTE LAL RATHORE Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, the petitioner impugns the order dated 29.05.2008 (Annexure-P/2) on the ground that the alleged excess amount paid to the petitioner during his service period has been directed to be recovered from the retiral dues of the petitioner.

(2.) The indisputable facts, in brief, are that the petitioner working as Assistant Engineer, retired from his service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.03.2008. Thereafter, without assigning any reason and without affording an opportunity of hearing, the impugned order 29.05.2008 (Annexure-P/2) was passed holding that excess payment has been made to the petitioner during the service period and the said amount has to be deducted from the retiral dues of the petitioner.

(3.) According to the petitioner, the alleged excess payment has been made to the petitioner while the petitioner was in service, however, the impugned recovery order has been passed only after retirement of the petitioner. Thus, the impugned order is bad in law and the same is not at all sustainable in the eyes of law. Thus, this petition.