MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri G. P. Yadav for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the respondents.

(2.) Aggrieved by the order of recovery dated 10.6.2009, passed by District Basic Education Officer, Aligarh directing for recovery of Rs. 2,03,057 alongwith interest from the petitioner in 24 equal instalments, the present writ petition has been filed seeking writ of certiorari for quashing the same.

(3.) Sri Yadav vehemently contended that the impugned order has been passed without giving any show cause notice or opportunity to him. He further submits that the petitioner was on medical leave during the period the alleged notice is said to have been issued but without giving any effective opportunity to the petitioner, the impugned order has been passed. He lastly submitted that the liability, if any, was not only of the petitioner but on the Gram Pradhan also but only the petitioner has been victimized by directing recovery from him instead of dividing the liability upon both the persons, namely, the petitioner and the Gram Pradhan.