KULA NAND THAKUR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. M.K. Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and V.K. Shahi, learned G.P.-III appearing for the respondents.

(2.) The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for quashing the order dated 24.12.1997 contained in Annexure-5 to the writ petition, whereby an order of recovery of Rs. 14,730/- was directed to be recovered from the salary of the petitioner and further prayer is made for quashing the order dated 04.12.1997 contained in Annexure-9 whereby order of recovery of a sum of Rs. 41,230.95/- is directed to be recovered from the petitioner.

(3.) Mr. Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the salary of the petitioner was rightly fixed by the respondents and without any rhymes or reasons the impugned orders have been passed. He further submits that there is no misrepresentation on behalf of the petitioner and the authorities concerned at their own wisdom have fixed the salary of the petitioner and accordingly, the impugned are not sustainable.