UMA SHANKAR SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. DEPTT. OF HOME LKO. AND 2 OTHERS
WRIA/5860/2025 · 2025-07-15
Manish Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 141600 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 141600 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:40331 Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5860 of 2025 Petitioner :- Uma Shankar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- M.P. Raju Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner, learned State Counsel for opposite parties.
2. Petition has been filed challenging order dated 6.4.2025 whereby deduction from leave encashment of petitioner has been effected from his post retiral benefits.
3. It has been submitted that the aspect of recovery/adjustment has been made from post retiral benefits of petitioner is evident from reply dated 12.09.2024 under Right to Information Act indicating that an amount of Rs.1,24,773/- has been adjusted in term of order dated 06.04.2024.
4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that aforesaid order has been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to petitioner.
5. Learned State Counsel on the basis of instructions submits that order has been passed in pursuance of consent given by petitioner and therefore, the aspect of opportunity of hearing stands satisfied.
6. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and from perusal of material on record, it is evident that impugned orders did not indicate any opportunity of hearing having been given to petitioner prior to making any
deduction from his post retiral benefits.
7. The aspect of such deduction could be made from post retiral benefits in terms of judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and others reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334 would also require consideration.
8. In view thereof, impugned order dated 06.04.2024 is hereby quashing by issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari granting liberty to respondents to reassess the aforesaid aspect but only after affording an opportunity of hearing to petitioner and consider his reply.
9. The aforesaid decision shall be taken by concerned authority within a period of eight weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is served upon him. The aspect of refund shall also be considered by the said authority in light of judgement rendered in the case of Rafiq Masih (supra).
10. With the aforesaid observations/directions, petition stands
disposed of.
Order Date :- 15.7.2025 Virendra Digitally signed by :- VIRENDRA KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench