MINAKSHI VISHWANATH CHAUDHARI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned advocate for the petitioners in all the petitions, learned A.G.P. and the learned advocate Mr. S.R. Dheple and learned advocate Mr. N.E. Deshmukh for the respondents-Zilla Parishads.

(2.) The petitioners are aggrieved by the recoveries being sought to be made by virtue of the orders after their retirement for recovery of the moneys as indicated in the chart extended to us across the Bar on the ground of their failure to complete MS-CIT within the stipulated period.

(3.) This Court has granted reliefs to similarly situated persons based on the decision in the matter of The State of Punjab Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) reported (2015 ) 4 SCC 334. It is not the case of the respondents that any undertaking was sought as is contemplated in High Court of Punjab and Haryana and others vs. Jagdev Singh ; 2016 AIR (SCW) 3523 No such recoveries could have been resorted to post retirement when it is not the petitioners' fault.