Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:20563-DB Chief Justice's Court Case :- WRIT - A No. - 1757 of 2025 Petitioner :- Union of India and 4 others Respondent :- Ajay Kumar Singh and another Counsel for Petitioner :- Shashi Prakash Singh (A.S.G.I.), Ashish Kumar Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J. 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioners aggrieved of the order dated 13.08.2024 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, whereby the Tribunal, while coming to the conclusion that the revision effected by the petitioners was not in accordance with the principles of natural justice and the whole exercise was carried out in an improper and arbitrary manner, set aside the impugned order dated 24.08.2020 and ordered for refund of the amount recovered alongwith interest @ 6% per annum. Further directions were given that petitioners would be free to pass a fresh order after granting adequate opportunity of hearing to the respondent and further ordered that no recovery shall be made from the respondent in view of law laid down in State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) etc.: (2015) 4 SCC 334. 2. Learned A.S.G.I. made submissions that the Tribunal was not justified on one hand, remanding back the matter and, on the other hand, restricting the powers of the petitioners to recover the amount. 3. Submissions have been made that various benefits have been accorded to the respondent from the date of appointment, whereas he was entitled for the same from the date of regularization and on account of the same, the order impugned dated 24.08.2020 was passed. It is submitted that once the matter was remanded back, it should have been left open for the petitioners to recover the amount from the respondent as, when the order dated 24.08.2020 was passed, the respondent was still in service and, therefore, the judgment in the case of Rafiq Masih (supra) would have no application. 4. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and have perused the material available on record. 5. The Tribunal, after coming to the conclusion that the order dated 24.08.2020 was passed in violation of principles of natural justice, had quashed the same and ordered for refund of the amount alongwith interest, however, it has kept it open for the petitioners to pass a fresh order after hearing the respondent and further ordered that on the aspect of recovery, the principles laid down in the case of Rafiq Masih (supra) would apply. 6. So far as the plea raised pertaining to the applicability of the principles laid down in the case of Rafiq Masih (supra) only on account of the fact that the respondent was still in service when the order dated 24.08.2020 was passed by the petitioners is concerned, Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rafiq Masih (supra) inter alia also indicated that recovery from employees, when excess payment has been made for the period in excess of five years before the order of recovery is issued, is impermissible in law. Admittedly, the order impugned was passed after twenty years from the date the same was passed and, therefore, the principles as laid down in Rafiq Masih (supra) would apply irrespective of the fact whether the respondent was in service or had retired. 7. In that view of the matter, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order impugned at the instance of the petitioners. The petition has no substance and the same is, therefore, dismissed. Order Date :- 13.2.2025 Sandeep/Sazia (Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ) Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad