1 2025:CGHC:57081 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6699 of 2017 1 - Bhagwat Prasad Bhargav S/o Late Shri Ramji Lal Bhargav Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Sonthi Police Station Bamhanidih, Tahsil Champa Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Department Of Education Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Director / Additional Director Account And Pension , Directorate Department Of Education 3 - The District Education Officer Janjgir Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Block Education Officer, Bamhnidih , Civil And Revenue District Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Vishvanath Shriwas, Advocate For Respondent / State : Shri Topilal Bareth, Panel Lawyer ({Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput}) Order on Board 24/11/2025 1. Following relief has been claimed in this writ petition - i) That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire 2 record from the respondent authorities. ii) That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash / set aside the letter dated 06/09/2017 (Annexure P/1) issued by respondent No.4/Block Education Officer Bamhnidih, District–Janjgir-Champa (CG) to address the petitioner for recovery of a sum of Rupees 1,46,789/- from pension of the petitioner after the retirement of more than 5 years. iii) Any other relief, which may be deemed, fit by this Hon’ble Court just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be provided in favour of the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as Peon in the year 1977 in the Govt. Higher Secondary School, Champa and thereafter, he was performing his duty with sincerity and honesty. During his service period, he was promoted on the post of Assistant Grade-III. After attaining the age of superannuation, he was retired on the post of Asst. Grade-III w.e.f. 30/09/2012 vide order dated 18/09/2012 (Annexure P/2). He submits that after a lapse of about 5 years, the impugned order of recovery (Annexure P/1) dated 06/09/2017 was issued directing the petitioner to pay Rs.1,46,789/- as negative balance of excess payment of salary. Therefore, the writ petition was filed. 3. Learned counsel for the State opposes the above submission and submits that according to the return of the State, the said amount was paid to the petitioner under the salary as a result, a negative balance of Rs.1,46,789/- is shown in the account of the petitioner and the said excess payment was made inadvertently. 4. Be that as it may, from perusal of the record, it appears that the petitioner retired in the month of September, 2012 and the impugned order of recovery was passed on 06/09/2017 i.e. after a lapse of about 5 years. The petitioner was a Class-III employee. Therefore, in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab and ors. V. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) etc. reported in 2015 AIR SCW 501, the impugned order cannot be sustained and is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 06/09/2017 is quashed. Sd/- ({Sachin Singh Rajput}) JUDGE Deepti DEEPTI HARIKUMAR Digitally signed by DEEPTI HARIKUMAR Date: 2025.11.26 11:00:29 +0530