1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 10216 of 2025 1 - Babulal Jangde S/o - Shri Prabhudas Jangde, Aged About 52 Years Posted As Head Master At Govt. Primary School, Kumhi, Pandariya, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh. R/o Village Koilarikapa, Pandariya, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mantralaya At Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya At Mahanadi Bhawan, Mahanadi, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Director, Directorate Of Public Instructions, Indrawati Bhawan Block 4 First Floor, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar District - Raipur (C.G.) 4 - The District Education Officer, Kawardha District Kabirdham (Kawardha), Chhattisgarh 5 - The Block Education Officer, Pandariya, District Kabirdham (Kawardha), Chhattisgarh 6 - The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Kabirdham, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh 7 - The Chief Executive Officer, Zanpad Panchayat, Pandariya, District - Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prashant Sahu, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Ms. Anuja Sharma, Panel Lawyer SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Digitally signed by SAGRIKA AGRAWAL Date: 2025.09.02 11:53:26 +0530 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal Order on Board 01/09/2025 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging the impugned order of recovery dated 14-05-2025 (Annexure P/1), whereby the State authorities have passed the order of recovery with respect to the excess payment towards benefit extended to the petitioner of Kramonnati Vetanman from the month of September-2020 till date. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, in an identical matter of WPS No. 9521 of 2023 and other batch of petitions, the co- ordinate bench of this Court has allowed the writ petition and quashed the impugned recovery orders of respective petitioners and the respondent authorities have been directed to consider and decide the claim of each of the petitioners in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders after giving proper opportunity of hearing to each of the petitioners. The claim of the present petitioner is also similar to those petitioners, who have filed writ petitions bearing WPS No. 9521 of 2023 and other batch of petitions, which has been decided on 22-01-2025 by coordinate bench of this Court, and the present petitioner may also be extended the same relief, as they have been granted. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State though opposes on merits, however, he could not dispute the order dated 22-01-2025 passed in WPS No. 9521 of 2023 and other batch of petitions and 3 would submit that the liberty may be reserved to the respondents/State to pass appropriate order with respect to the recovery after giving proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available in the case. 5. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, further considering that the issue has already been decided vide order dated 22-01-2025, passed in WPS No. 9521 of 2023 and other batch of petitions by coordinate bench of this Court, this Court deem it appropriate not to take any other view than the order passed by coordinate bench of this Court on 22-01-2025 in WPS No. 9521 of 2023 and other batch of petitions, and the present writ petition is also disposed of in the same terms and conditions as mentioned in WPS No. 9521 of 2023, order dated 22-01-2025, reserving the liberty to the respondents/State to decide the claim of the petitioner, in accordance with law, on its own merits and pass appropriate orders after verifying the records and giving proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 6. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge sagrika