Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:21685 Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 15226 of 2020 Petitioner :- Shahzad Khan Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Virendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned A.C.S.C. for the respondents. 2. In the present case, pleadings have been exchanged and with the consent of counsel for parties the case is being decided at the admission stage itself. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after retirement vide impugned order dated 27.04.2020 certain dues amounting to Rs. 7,60,534/- has been deducted/recovered from the post retiral benefits of the petitioner due to excess payment made to him. He next submitted that excess payment was made due to incorrect fixation of pay scale, for which petitioner is not responsible and he has neither played any fraud nor concealed any fact, therefore, such recovery is in teeth of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer); (2015) 4 SCC 334. 4. Learned A.C.S.C. could not dispute from the counter affidavit that the petitioner is responsible for the wrong fixation of pay. 5. I have considered the rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records as well as impugned order. Apex Court in the case of Rafiq Masih (supra) while dealing with such dispute, had framed following guidelines:- "12. 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, summarize 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." 6. Undisputedly, case of petitioner is squarely covered with the judgement of Rafiq Masih (supra) and petitioner was not responsible for fixation of incorrect pay scale and consequently for excess payment. 7. Therefore, under such facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order dated 27.04.2020 is hereby quashed so far as it relates to recovery of amount of Rs. 7,60,534/- and writ petition is allowed. The respondent concerned is directed to release the entire deducted amount of Rs. 7,60,534/- to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order. 8. In case, the amount of Rs. 7,60,534/- is not released within the aforesaid period, same shall carry simple interest @ 7% per annum from the date the amount became due till the date of its payment. Order Date :- 13.2.2025 ADY Digitally signed by :- AMAR DEEP YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad