Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:40147 Court No. - 18 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7563 of 2025 Petitioner :- Brijesh Kumar Chaubey Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Ayush Anubhag-1, Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohammad Tauseef Siddiqui,Shiv Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties. 2. Present petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed challenging order dated 29.11.2023 whereby recovery from salary of petitioner has been directed to be effected on ground that excess payment of salary was made to petitioner since March 2005 till October 2023. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is currently employed as a Class III employee and by means of impugned order, recovery has been effected without affording him any opportunity of hearing, for benefits which petitioner has been drawing for the past twenty years. It is submitted that impugned order does not indicate any complicity or misrepresentation on part of petitioner in the alleged excess payment of salary. He has relied upon judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Punjab & others v. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) & others reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334. 4. Learned State Counsel has been provided written instruction dated 14.07.2025, a copy of which is taken on record, and as per which impugned order has been passed in pursuance of Government Order dated 05.12.2001 and since it was established that petitioner was paid excess salary. Instructions also indicate consent submitted by petitioner on 18.08.2023 for recovery to be effected from his salary. 5. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, it is evident from a perusal of impugned order dated 29.11.2023 that re-fixation of pay of petitioner with effect from March, 2005 has been effected along with directions for recovery but it is also evident that prior to passing of impugned order, no opportunity of hearing has been provided to petitioner. 6. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Punjab & others v. Rafiq Masih(supra) has clearly enunciated that recovery cannot be effected from salary of Class III and Class IV employees particularly when there is no allegation of any fraud or misrepresentation on part of the employee. 7. In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances, impugned order dated 29.11.2023 is hereby quashed by issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari granting liberty to authority concerned to pass orders afresh regarding pay-fixation but only after affording opportunity of hearing to him and considering his reply. Aforesaid exercise shall keep in mind directions issued by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Punjab & others v. Rafiq Masih(supra). Such a decision shall be taken within a period of eight weeks. Refund of recovery made from petitioner's salary shall also be made by the authority by the same order. 8. Resultantly, the petition succeeds and is allowed. Order Date :- 15.7.2025 kvg/- Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench