SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS D- 54 WPSS No. 359 of 2025 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Mr. Tapan Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Narain Dutt, Standing Counsel for the State. The instant petition was decided in terms of judgment dated 13.08.2021, passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 609 of 2020 (S/S), Ramchandra Tomar v. State of Uttarakhand and others, and connected cases. Now, a modification application has been filed. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the file. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that it is a case of recovery of excess payment, which cannot be made in view of the judgement passed in the writ petition. But, he would submit that since the Court has not passed specific order quashing the order of recovery, the department has directed the petitioner that they would continue with the recovery, until the recovery order is quashed. Learned State Counsel was required to get instruction. Today, learned counsel for the State gives a statement that according to the instruction, no excess amount has been recovered from the petitioner and even it is not intended to be recovered. The written instruction received by the learned State Counsel is taken on record. The Court takes on record the statement made by the learned State Counsel. The modification application (MCC No. 2 of 2025) stands disposed of accordingly. (Ravindra Maithani J.) 30.04.2025 Avneet/