2025:UHC:6595-DB HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition Service Bench No. 200 of 2020 29 July, 2025 Pooran Singh Mehra -----Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand & others ----Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------- Presence:- Mr. Piyush Tiwari Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Devendra Singh Bora, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand / respondent no. 1. Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh, Advocate for respondent nos. 2 & 3. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Hon’ble Subhash Upadhyay, J. (Per: Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) JUDGMENT Petitioner was appointed as Assistant Seeds Production Officer on 27.10.1981 and he retired from service as Deputy Chief Seeds Production Officer from Uttarakhand Seeds and Tarai Development Corporation, Pantnagar, Udham Singh Nagar, on 31.03.2017. His retiral dues were not being released, therefore, he filed Writ Petition (S/B) No. 598 of 2018. A coordinate Bench disposed of the writ petition vide order dated 17.12.2019, directing the authorities to pay retiral dues to petitioner within three months. Pursuant to the said order, retiral dues were released to the petitioner, but, after deducting `58,750/- from the amount payable as 1 2025:UHC:6595-DB leave encashment. Thus, feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached this Court, challenging the recovery of `58,750/- from his retiral dues. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that neither any notice was issued nor any disciplinary enquiry was held against petitioner, before deducting the aforesaid amount. He submits that there is no material whatsoever to form an opinion that petitioner is responsible for loss of any amount. He further submits that no recovery order was passed and the amount has been simply deducted by respondent without any authority of law. 3. Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh, learned counsel appearing for Uttarakhand Seeds and Tarai Development Corporation Limited refers to correspondence, which was made by the Joint Chief Seeds Production Officer with petitioner, which are enclosed as Annexure Nos. 2 & 3 of the counter affidavit. 4. Perusal of the correspondence reveals that foundation seeds were distributed to farmers of District Aligarh and price of such seeds was yet to be recovered and petitioner was simply asked to do the needful for recovery of price of seeds. In none of those letters, petitioner was held liable for causing any loss to the Corporation or was asked to deposit the amount from his own pocket. 5. Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh, learned counsel appearing for Uttarakhand Seeds and Tarai Development Corporation Limited fairly submits that 2 2025:UHC:6595-DB recovery was made from retiral dues of petitioner without there being any show cause notice or disciplinary enquiry held against him. He also concedes that no recovery order was passed. He, however, refers to a note-sheet, which is enclosed as Annexure No.-4 to the counter affidavit, in which a decision was taken on the file that retiral dues of petitioner may be released after deducting `58,750/-. 6. The course of action adopted by respondents cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. For making any recovery from the retiral dues of an employee, there has to be a finding that the employee has caused loss to the Corporation and that loss has also to be quantified. In the present case, there is no such finding and even order authorizing recovery from the retiral dues, has also not been passed and communicated to petitioner by the competent authority. 7. Even otherwise also, petitioner retired on 31.03.2017 and the decision to recover the aforesaid amount was taken on 16.03.2020, as is reflected from the note-sheet enclosed as Annexure-4 to the counter affidavit. 8. Since the master-servant relationship got severed upon superannuation of petitioner, therefore, in the absence of any enabling provision in the rules, to pass order of recovery against an employee, post retirement, the decision to make recovery from the retiral dues payable to petitioner was not proper. 3 2025:UHC:6595-DB 9. For the aforesaid reasons, the writ petition is allowed. The Managing Director, Uttarakhand Seeds and Tarai Development Corporation Limited is directed to refund the amount of `58,750/-, deducted from the retiral dues of the petitioner, with 5% simple interest, within six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order. (Subhash Upadhyay, J.) (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 29.07.2025 Navin 4 NAVEEN CHANDRA Digitally signed by NAVEEN CHANDRA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb9046f487df00 6da82a131bb4e4403d3c0a15, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103819DA8756 43AF56D653D095C6ED9A86DAAB21CE5, cn=NAVEEN CHANDRA Date: 2025.08.04 09:43:28 +05'30'