Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 12816 (ALL)

RAKESH KUMAR BATHAM v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

WRIA/1164/2025 · 2025-08-12

Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:137846 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1164 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Batham Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manish Dev Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Saurabh Tiwari Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. Heard Sri Manish Dev, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Saurabh Tiwari, learned counsel for respondent. 2. The petitioner has approached this Court that he is retired on 31.08.2024 and after his retirement, till date his retiral benefits has not been paid and he refers the documents annexed along with this writ petition i.e. retiral dues as calculated by respondent is Rs. 18,76,930/-. 3. Learned counsel for respondent submits that as per the re- calculation, retiral dues is Rs.17,71,056/- as well as during service period some excess amount was also paid to petitioner i.e. about Rs.11,05,965/- and after retirement an amount of about Rs.8 lac was paid in installment i.e. on 04.05.2025, 30.03.2025 and on 06.05.2025. 4. Learned counsel for petitioner has not disputed that after filing this writ petition, the aforesaid amount is received in the bank account of petitioner. Learned counsel for petitioner further submits that excess amount if already paid, cannot be recovered by respondent after the retirement of petitioner i.e. a class IV employee. 5. At this stage, learned counsel for respondent has informed that a show-cause notice was issued on 17.05.2025 for recovery of excess amount paid, which was served upon petitioner and a reply thereof was submitted on 22.05.2025, however, petitioner has not instructed his counsel about said document. 6. I have considered the above submissions and perused the record. 7. According to respondent, entire retiral amount has been paid which has been substantially accepted by petitioner except the amount paid during his service period. Since the issue in regard to recovery, if any, is seized with concerned respondent, therefore, the Court is not adjudicating said dispute at this stage and respondent have liberty to pass a reasoned order, taking note of legal and factual aspect. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 13.8.2025 P. Pandey Digitally signed by :- PUSHPENDRA PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad