1 2025:CGHC:20634 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3187 of 2025 1 - Rajendra Kumar Gupta S/o Late Shri Ram Jeevan Prasad Gupta Aged About 62 Years Working On The Post Of Assistant Engineer, Public Works Department, In The Office Of Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, Public Works Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Naya Raipur, Post Office - Rakhi, District - Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2 - The Chief Engineer Public Works Department, Bilaspur Zone, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - The Assistant Engineer Public Works Department, Jashpur Division, Jashpur, District - Jashpur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. V.K.Pandey, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. Vinay Pandey, Dy.A.G. Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 06/05/2025 AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2025.05.07 18:22:02 +0530 2 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is questioning the order Annexure P-1 dated 22/04/2025, by which, the respondents have passed an order of recovery of RS. 3,87,631/- from the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is presently working as Assistant Engineer in the department of Public Works and he is going to be retired within a period of two months and during the fag end of service, the recovery order has been issued without observing the principle of natural justice. He submits that no opportunity of hearing and no notice was issued to the petitioner before issuance of the order dated 22/04/2025. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent/State submits that though this is an order of recovery for recovery of government fund and it is not because of any excess payment to the petitioner during his tenure as a Assistant Engineer, hence, there is no illegality in the order impugned dated 22/04/2025. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the pleadings and documents. 5. It appears that the amount of Rs.3,87,631/- has been directed to be recovered from the petitioner as a government fund. Though, the order of recovery has been issued, but the same is not reflecting for what reason, the said recovery is being made from the petitioner and it is not clear from the order itself 3 that any opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner before issuance of the said recovery order. Hence, the impugned order dated 22/04/2025 Annexure P-1 has been passed by the respondent is in clear violation of principle of natural justice and the same is liable to be and is hereby quashed. However, the respondents are at liberty to proceed to recover the amount as stated in the impugned order by following the principles of natural justice. The State is at liberty to issue notice to the petitioner within period of five days by granting the petitioner 15 days time to submit reply to the said show cause notice, thereafter the State shall pass an appropriate order in accordance with law within a further period of 10 days of receipt of the reply of the petitioner. 6. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Amardeep