Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:73737 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3338 of 2014 Petitioner :- Mohd. Ahmadullah Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Faizan Ahmad,S.F.A. Naqvi Counsel for Respondent :- B.P. Singh Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. Heard Sri S.F.A. Naqvi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Syed Ahmad Faizan, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri Mewa Lal Gupta, learned Standing Counsel for State. 2. It is not under much dispute that petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in concerned institution on 16.11.1973 as untrained teacher and later on he passed B.T.C. in 1977 and subsequently, with effect from 1978, he was granted salary of trained teacher. 3. It is also not much under dispute that in the year 1985 i.e. on 21.04.1986, he was absorbed in Junior High School, in the higher pay scale of 450-720. The dispute arose when issue of benefit of selection grade cropped up as it was paid after 10 years from 1973, whereas according to respondents, it ought to be calculated from 1986 and, therefore, petitioner would have become entitled for selection grade with effect from 1996 and 3rd selection grade after 12 years. 4. On basis of aforesaid finding, it was directed that excess amount paid from 1986 to 1996 be recovered and selection grade be given to petitioner only in accordance with law. 5. Learned Senior Counsel for petitioner submits that though no interim order was passed in present writ petition but according to instruction, no recovery was made probably on ground that present writ petition was pending since 2013 and now petitioner has retired about 5 years ago and, therefore, at this stage, recovery would not only be harsh but would be against in the interest of justice also. 6. Sri Mewa Lal Gupta, learned Standing Counsel for State refers the relevant part of impugned order wherein aforesaid facts are referred though he has not able to dispute that in case, recovery is still not made, probably it would be barred by law after five years of retirement. 7. I have considered the above submission and perused the record. I am of the opinion that reason assigned in impugned order appears to be correct. The relevant Government Order for the purpose of determination of selection grade is not on record but since petitioner has got upgradation in 1986, therefore, first selection grade would be applicable only after 10 years i.e. in 1996. 8. Despite above observation, the Court takes note of subsequent events that during pendency of this writ petition, petitioner has retired about 5 years ago, therefore, in the interest of justice, as well as taking note on State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih (whitewasher), (2014) 8 SCC 883 the recovery after 5 years of retirement may not be legally justifiable, therefore, this writ petiton is disposed of with making a modification in impugned order that no recovery be made of excess amount paid towards selection grade between 1986-96. Order Date :- 7.5.2025 P. Pandey Digitally signed by :- PUSHPENDRA PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad