1 2025:CGHC:31478-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 455 of 2025 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, Department of Home/ Police, Mantralaya At Mahanadi Bhwan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, (Respondents) 2 - Director General Of Police (Dgp) Police Head Quarter (Phq), Near Mahanadi Mantralaya, Police Station And Post Rakhi, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Inspector General Of Police (I.G.P.), Office Of Inspector General Of Police, 32 Banglow, Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh 4 - Superintendent Of Police (S.P.) Office Of Superintendent Of Police, Baghera, P.S. Baghera, Durg, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh ... Appellants versus 1 - Divya Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Nanku Das Sahu Aged About 34 Years R/o S.T.F. Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg, P.S. - Baghera, Tahsil And District - Durg, Chhattisgarh 2 - Neeran Lal S/o Shri Punaram Aged About 34 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 3 - Nilesh Panday S/o Shri G.P. Panday Aged About 34 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 4 - Lokendra Singh S/o Shri Daulat Singh Aged About 33 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 5 - Lalit Tiwari S/o Shri Tribeni Prasad Aged About 31 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 6 - Markanday Rai S/o Late Shri Ramsurat Aged About 32 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA 2 7 - Ashok Kumar S/o Shri Ram Ashray Singh Aged About 36 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 8 - Dinesh Patel S/o Shri Pyaare Lal Patel Aged About 24 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 9 - Om Prakash Shukla S/o Shri Jagdeesh Shukla Aged About 32 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 10 - Sandeep Mishra S/o Shri Vashishta Mishra Aged About 34 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 11 - Surdas Bhoyar S/o Late Shri Dhan Singh Aged About 35 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 12 - Upendra Savita S/o Late Shri Devidayal Aged About 32 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 13 - Deepak Sharma S/o Shri Sundar Lal Sharma Aged About 32 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 14 - Ramadhar Baghel S/o Shri Manbodh Baghel Aged About 34 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 15 - Bhaskar Prasad Sharma S/o Shri Matadin Sharma Aged About 34 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 16 - Sanatan Sidar S/o Shri Dev Prasad Aged About 35 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 17 - Ghanshayam Yadav S/o Late Shri Jogeshwar Yadav Aged About 33 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 18 - Ambrish Kumar S/o Shri Ramnath Aged About 36 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 19 - Mritunjay Kushwaha S/o Late Shri Mangaru Bhagat Aged About 33 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 3 20 - Girdhar Prasad Sahu S/o Shri Om Prakash Sahu Aged About 33 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 21 - Arun Nareti S/o Shri Shayam Lal Nareti Aged About 37 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 22 - Indra Singh Netam S/o Shri Arjun Singh Netam Aged About 34 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 23 - Jai Singh Netam S/o Shri Midhu Ram Netam Aged About 35 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 24 - Arvind Kumar S/o Shri Chandrabhan Singh Aged About 35 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 25 - Vikram Das Sahu S/o Shri Prabhu Dayal Sahu Aged About 34 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh 26 - Manendra Pratap Singh S/o Shri Gopal Singh Aged About 34 Years R/o Stf Head Quarter, Baghera, Durg P.S. Baghera, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Appellants/State : Mr. Yashwant Singh Thakur, Additional Advocate General For Respondents : Mr. Abhishek Pandey, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 09 .07 .2025 1 Heard Mr. Yashwant Singh Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State/appellants as well as Mr.Abhishek Pandey, learned counsel, appearing for the State/respondents 4 No.1 on I.A. No. 02/2025, which is an application for condonation of delay of 95 days in filing the present appeal. 2 On due consideration and for the reasons mentioned in the application, the same allowed. Delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the appeal is heard finally. 3 By way of present writ appeal under Sub-Section (1) of Section 2 of the Chhattisgarh High Court (Appeal to Division Bench Act, 2006, the appellants, who were respondents in the writ petition, have challenged the order dated 29.01.2025 passed by learned Single Judge in WPS No.9793 of 2019 (Divya Kumar Sahu & Others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others), by which the writ petition filed by the writ petitioners/respondents herein has been allowed by the learned Single Judge. 4 Brief facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are that the writ petitioners / respondents here have filed a writ petition being WPS No. 9793 of 2019 being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 10.10.2019 (Annexure P/1), whereby recovery notice was issued to the petitioner to recover the excess amount on the ground of excess payment during their service tenure due to wrong fixation. The learned Single Judge vide order dated 27.11.2019 passed an interim order in favour of the petitioners, staying the effect and operation of recovery notice dated 10.10.2019 (Annexure P-1) till the next date of hearing and ultimately, vide impugned order 5 dated 29.01.2025, the said writ petition was allowed by the learned Single Judge and directed the respondents/State to refund the amount, if already recovered to the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of order, failing which the aforesaid amount shall carry interest @ 6% per annum till actual date of payment. Being aggrieved by the said order passed by the learned Single Judge, instant appeal has been filed by the State/appellants. 5 Mr. Yashwant Singh Thakru, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State/appellants submitted that it is an admitted position that the petitioners were being paid on the basis of erroneous fixation of pay, the petitioners never challenged the recovery so being made from them and the appellants are ready to refund the amount so recovered from the petitioners / respondents herein, but the payment of interest on said amount would be unjust and if the instant writ appeal is not allowed, it would amount to huge financial burden upon the appellants / State. 6 On the other hand, Mr. Abhishek Pandey, learned counsel for respondents submitted that despite passing of the interim order in favour of the petitioners, staying the effect and operation of recovery notice dated 10.10.2019 (Annexure P-1) till the next date of hearing by the learned Single Judge, the appellants had recovered the amount from the respondents herein as such, they 6 are entitled for amount so recovered along with interest @ 6% per annum till actual date of payment as ordered by the learned Single Judge. 7 We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order and other documents appended with writ appeal. 8 Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the impugned order and materials available on record, it is apparent that the petitioners are Class - III employees and as per decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab & Ors Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) & Ors, reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334, recovery from the petitioners is not permissible and as such, we do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the writ petition was allowed and the respondents therein were directed to refund the amount, if recovery is already made, within a period of three months from the date of order, failing which, the aforesaid amount shall carry interest @ 6% per annum till actual date of payment. Further, it transpires that despite there being an interim order in favour of the petitioners, staying the effect and operation of recovery notice dated 10.10.2019 (Annexure P-1) till the next date of hearing passed by the learned Single Judge, the appellants had recovered the amount from the writ petitioners /respondents herein and though appellants are intended to refund the amount, but they had not refunded the same within a period of 7 three month as has been ordered by the learned Single Judge, as such, the writ petitioners / respondents are entitled for amount so recovered along with interest @ 6% per annum till actual date of payment as ordered by the learned Single Judge. 9 Accordingly, the writ appeal being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s). Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Chandra