1 2025:CGHC:16861 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2445 of 2025 1 - Bhushan Lal Sahu S/o Shri Shobhit Ram Sahu Aged About 71 Years R/o Village And Post Ravan, Tahsil Balodabazar District Balodabazar Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Secretary High Power Pension Redressal Committee Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Accountant General Raipur District Raipur Chhatttisgarh 4 - District Education Officer District Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh 5 - Block Education Officer Block Balodabazar, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara Chhattisgarh Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) :Mr. K.P. Sahu, Advocate For Respondent(s)/State :Mr. Kanwaljeet Singh Saini, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.3 :Mr. Ashwani Shukla, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2025.04.16 17:41:44 +0530 2 11/04/2025 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is questioning the order Annexure P-2, by which, the respondent No.2 has passed an order directing the recovery of negative balance of Rs.2,29,877/- subsequently corrected as Rs.1,63,198/- from the petitioner as the petitioner’s GPF account were showing a negative balance of Rs.1,63,198/- 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after retirement, the negative balance in the GPF account cannot be recovered, as the petitioner retired on 30/04/2016. Learned counsel for the petitioner relying upon the judgment of coordinate Bench of this Court in the matter of Dharmu Ram Mandavi Vs. State of C.G. & Ors passed in WPS No.2617/2013, that after retirement, the negative balance in the GPF account cannot be recovered after a period of six months from the date of retirement by adjustment, for that, the Government has to follow the legal procedure of approaching civil Court, hence, the impugned order of recovery passed by the respondent No.2 is liable to be quashed. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submit that this is a negative balance showing in the GPF account as the petitioner has taken advance from the GPF account, therefore, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents. 3 5. It appears from the order dated 29/06/2016 issued by the Office of the Accountant General, Raipur that the negative balance has been directed to be recovered from the petitioner, whereas the petitioner retired on 30/04/2016 i.e. within a period of two months after his retirement. The GPF account were showing a negative balance of Rs.2,29,877/-, however, subsequently the same was corrected on 21/09/2016 as Rs.1,63,198/-. Hence, there is no illegality in the order of recovery as well as the order of High Power Pension Redressal Committee, by which, the respondents have directed to recover the amount of negative balance showing in the GPF account of the petitioner, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Amardeep