Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:119762 Court No. - 4 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 17650 of 2023 Petitioner :- Ram Khilawan Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Puneet Kumar Verma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J. Heard Sri Puneet Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioner has questioned the recovery dated 15.05.2023, whereby, the access amount paid to him was directed to be recovered after his retirement that took place on 31.03.2023. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the case of the petitioner stands covered by the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab and others vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) etc.: 2014 Law Suit (SC) 1075. It is further contended that the order impugned dated 15.05.2023 has been passed without giving any opportunity hearing before correcting the pay fixation. Per contra it is argued by learned Standing Counsel that petitioner had given an undertaking at the time of pay fixation in the year 2008 when he was being given benefit of Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme to the effect that for any wrongful pay fixation he would be liable to refund the amount if paid in excess. He has drawn the attention of the Court to the consent letter in the form of undertaking given by the petitioner on 30.12.2008. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that in the light of the judgment of Supreme Court in the matter of High Court of Punjab and Haryana v. Jagdev Singh, Civil Appeal No. 3500 of 2016 decided on 29.07.2016, if the employee has given undertaking at the time of pay fixation to refund the amount for access payment for wrongful pay fixation, then such an employee would be bound by such undertaking. Paragraph no. 11 of the said judgment has been relied upon which is reproduced hereunder: "11. The principle enunciated in proposition (ii) above cannot apply to a situation such as in the present case. In the present case, the officer to whom the payment was made in the first instance was clearly placed on notice that any payment found to have been made in excess would be required to be refunded. The officer furnished an undertaking while opting for the revised pay scale. He is bound by the undertaking." I find that the petitioner in rejoinder affidavit has not disputed the undertaking given by him, although plea is taken that petitioner himself was not responsible for any alleged wrongful pay fixation. In the considered view of the Court once the petitioner had given an undertaking, the case of the petitioner stands covered by the exception drawn in the judgment of Jagdev Singh (supra) by the Supreme Court while considering its own judgment in Rafiq Masih (supra) and hence I do not find any force in the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner ought not to have been saddled with the liability of recovery pursuant to the order impugned after retirement in the light of the judgment of Supreme Court in Rafiq Masih (supra), however, it is established from the records and the pleadings raised by the parties that the petitioner was not afforded any opportunity of hearing before correcting the pay fixation and directing for recovery of amount towards the post retirement dues under the order dated 15.05.2023. To this extent therefore, I consider it appropriate for the petitioner to take the order dated 15.05.2023 and further the fixation order annexed along with the counter affidavit as Annexure No. 3, as a notice and submit his explanation within a period of four weeks from today before the competent authority namely the respondent no. 3 and if he does so, then the competent authority will be passing order afresh which shall be reasoned and speaking one and the order impugned for recovery and adjustment shall abide by the decision to be taken by the authority. This petition stands disposed of in the above terms. Order Date :- 22.7.2025 IrfanUddin Digitally signed by :- IRFAN UDDIN SIDDIKI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad