COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 13159 of 2025 Court No. - 7 HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties. 2. Amendment Application filed today is taken on record. By means of the said Application, applicant seeks to challenge orders dated 30.09.2024 and 21.01.2025 as well as orders dated 10.07.2024 and 21.01.2025 whereby pay admissible to petitioner has been re-determined and order for recovery of excess payment has also been issued. 3. Since amendment sought does not change the nature of lis in any manner, the amendment application is allowed. 4. Consequential amendments in the memorandum of Writ Petition shall be incorporated during course of the day. 5. It has been submitted that by learned counsel for petitioner that after his superannuation on 30.04.2024, the salary benefits accorded to petitioner since year 2007 have been re-determined with recovery/adjustment of Rs.6,19,130/- being effected against his post-retiral benefits. 6. It is submitted that the impugned order has evidently been passed without any opportunity of hearing being provided to petitioner and also it being in violation of 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 as well as Government order dated 16.01.2007. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Brijesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Anand Singh Mer P. No 832121414 .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 4 Others .....Respondent(s) 7. Learned State Counsel has been provided written instructions dated 30.11.2025, which is taken on record and as per which it is admitted that petitioner's pay was redetermined after his superannuation since it was observed in audit objection that excess payment had been made to petitioner due to incorrect fixation of pay scale. 8. The aspect as to whether recovery can be effected on account of incorrect fixation of pay-scale has already been dealt with in judgment rendered by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in State of Punjab & others v. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) & others (supra). Relevant portions of the judgment reads as under:- "18. It is not possible to postulate all situations of hardship, which would govern employees on the issue of recovery, where payments have mistakenly been made by the employer, in excess of their entitlement. Be that as it may, based on the decisions referred to herein above, we may, as a ready reference, summarise the following few situations, wherein recoveries by the employers, would be impermissible in law: (i) Recovery from employees belonging to Class-III and Class-IV service (or Group 'C' and Group 'D' service). (ii) Recovery from retired employees, or employees who are due to retire within one year, of the order of recovery. (iii) Recovery from employees, when the excess payment has been made for a period in excess of five years, before the order of recovery is issued. (iv) Recovery in cases where an employee has wrongfully been required to discharge duties of a higher post, and has been paid accordingly, even though he should have rightfully been required to work against an inferior post. (v) In any other case, where the Court arrives at the conclusion, that recovery if made from the employee, would be iniquitous or harsh or arbitrary to such an extent, as would far outweigh the equitable balance of the employer's right to recover." 9. Upon applicability of aforesaid decision of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the present facts and circumstances, it is evident that petitioner is a Class IV employee and deductions have been made WRIA No. 13159 of 2025 2 from his post-retiral benefits. There is no assertion by opposite parties that alleged incorrect fixation of pay-scale was on account of any fraud or misrepresentation on part of petitioner. It is also evident that prior to making deduction, no opportunity of hearing whatsoever has been provided to petitioner. 10. In view thereof, impugned orders dated 30.09.2024 and 21.01.2025 as well as orders dated 10.07.2024 and 21.01.2025 and any other concomitant order(s) requiring recovery/adjustment to be made from retiral benefits of petitioner are hereby quashed by issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari granting liberty to opposite parties to pass orders afresh with regard to pay-fixation but only after affording opportunity of hearing to petitioner and considering his reply. It is also directed that the amount already recovered from petitioner shall be refunded to him within a period of six weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is served upon opposite parties concerned. 11. Consequently, the petition succeeds and is allowed at the admission stage itself. Parties to bear their own costs. November 20, 2025 kvg/- WRIA No. 13159 of 2025 3 (Manish Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- GIREESAN KV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench