HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 15027 of 2025 Court No. - 34 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. Heard Sri Vidhya Shanker Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Pramod Kumar Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, who appears for State-respondents. 2. The counsel for the rival parties have made a joint statement that they do not propose to file any further affidavits thus with the consent of the parties, writ petition is being decided at the fresh stage. 3. The case of the writ petitioner is that he was retired from the post of Assistant Development Officer (ISB), Block Development Office Rewati, Ballia on 31.07.2020, however a period of 5 years, a recovery certificate came to be issued on 06.06.2025 under the signatures of District Panchayatraj Officer, Ballia recovering an amount of Rs. 2,65,000/- as referable to the year 2016-17. 4. This Court entertained the present writ petition on 07.10.2025 granting time to the learned Standing Counsel to obtain instructions. Today instructions have been forwarded under the signature of District Panchayatraj Officer, Ballia on 25.10.2025. 5. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner has submitted that the said recovery proceedings could not have been initiated against the writ petitioner, particularly, when the writ petitioner stood retired on 31.07.2020. It is further contended that the recovery certificate has been issued after a period of 5 years. Further submission is that the writ petitioner has not been put to notice and the entire action is unilateral besides in violation of principles of natural justice and had the writ petitioner being put to notice, he Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Vidhya Shanker Tiwari Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Omkar Rai .....Petitioner(s) State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 Others .....Respondent(s) would be amply administrated that there would be no case of recovery. 6. Sri Pramod Kumar Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits that once the writ petitioner had misappropriated the amount then it is always open for the employer to recover the same, however, according to him, it is not forthcoming that the writ petitioner was put to notice which was imperative. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the records carefully. 8. Apparently, the writ petitioner stood retired on 31.07.2020, however, now the recovery certificate issued on 06.06.2025, there is nothing on record to show that the writ petitioner was put to notice or any order has been passed even the instructions as silent, issuance of notice was imperative. 9. Accordingly, the writ petition is being decided in the following manner: (a). The impugned order dated 06.06.2025 passed by the respondent no. 3 is set aside. (b). The matter stands remitted back to pass fresh order strictly in accordance with law after putting notice to the writ petitioner. 10. Needless to point out that the Court has not adjudicated upon the merits of the case. 11. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. 12. Instructions filed today are taken on record as marked as appendix A. October 28, 2025 A. Prajapati WRIA No. 15027 of 2025 2 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad