1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1247 of 2021 1 - Smt. Uma Dixit W/o Mahendra Mohan Dixit Aged About 67 Years R/o Torwa, Rajkumar Shukla Shaw Mill, P.S. Torwa, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Urban Administration And Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director Directorate, Urban Administration And Development Department, Block - 4, Fourth Floor, Indrawati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Deputy Director (Pension) Directorate Urban Administration And Development Department, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Joint Director Regional Office, Urban Administration And Development Department, Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. CJK Rao, Advocate For State : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Dy.G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 05.08.2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1. That, this Hon'ble may kindly be pleased to -2- set-aside the notice dated 04.02.2021 (Annexure P/1) and further directed the respondent authorities not withhold the pension of the petitioner. 10.2. That, this Hon'ble may kindly be pleased to direct the. respondent authorities to refund the amount which is already been recovered from the petitioner. 10.3. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief as it may deems fit and appropriate.” 2. Mr. Rao, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, would submit that the petitioner was working on the post of Chowkidar in the Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur, and she is a widow. He would further submit that the husband of the petitioner has died after filing this petition. He would also submit that the petitioner had retired from services on 31.08.2016, and immediately, thereafter, retiral dues were paid. He would contend that an amount of Rs.8,85,770/- was paid against the gratuity. He would further contend that after about five years, on 04.02.2021, a show cause notice was issued by respondent No.3, wherein, it was stated that the petitioner was paid an amount of gratuity to the tune of Rs.8,85,770/- due to a mistake as she was entitled to receive the amount of Rs.3,85,770/- only and she was directed to refund the excess payment. Mr. Rao would also submit that the department has already recovered a sum of Rs.2,21,512/-. He would also contend that the petitioner has challenged the notice dated 04.02.2021, and an interim order was passed by this Court in her 3 favour on 15.03.2021. He would pray to quash the notice dated 04.02.2021. 3. On the other hand, Ms. Shukla, learned Deputy Government Advocate appearing for the State, would oppose the submissions made by Mr. Rao. She would submit that after retirement, due to the mistake of the department, Rs.8,85,770/- was paid to the petitioner against the amount of gratuity, whereas she was entitled to receive a sum of Rs.3,85,770/-. She would further submit that a show cause notice was issued by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur on 06.03.2020, and thereafter, the petitioner had given her consent to adjust the amount paid in excess from arrears of the seventh pay scale and pension. She would contend that the consent was given by the petitioner herself; therefore, the amount of Rs.2,21,512/- was adjusted against the arrears of the seventh pay scale. She would further contend that it is not a case of excess payment made to an employee for a couple of years, but rather it is a case where, due to a mistake, the amount of gratuity was paid in excess, and an undertaking was given by the employee herself. She would contend that the petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents. 5. Admittedly, the petitioner retired from the post of Chowkidar on -4- 31.08.2016, and she is a widow. She was paid an amount of gratuity to the tune of Rs.8,85,770/-, whereas she was entitled to receive a sum of Rs.3,85,770/-. Initially, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, and an undertaking was given by the petitioner. She had given her consent to adjust the amount of excess payment from her pension and the arrears of the seventh pay scale. The respondent authorities adjusted Rs.2,21,512/- from the arrears of the seventh pay scale, and the rest of the amount of Rs.2,78,488/- is still outstanding. 6. Considering the fact that the petitioner was a Class-IV employee working on the post of Chowkidar and she is a widow, she is surviving on the amount of pension only, and there was no misrepresentation on the part of the petitioner, therefore, the present petition is allowed in part. The amount of Rs.2,21,512/-, which has already been recovered, shall not be refunded to the petitioner by the department, but at the same time, the balance amount, which is yet to be recovered, i.e. Rs.2,78,488/-, shall not be recovered from any of the accounts including the pension account of the petitioner. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha