Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Uttarakhand · body

2026 DAILYLAW 2857 (UTT)

RAVINDRA SINGH v. UTTARAKHAND TRANSPORT OCRPORATION

WPSS/2307/2024 · 2026-04-09

Manoj Kumar Tiwari

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

2026:UHC:2562 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS WPSS 2307/2024 Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J. Mr. M.C. Pant, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Lalit Samant, Advocate, for the respondents. (2) Petitioner retired from the post of Junior Centre In-charge from Uttarakhand Transport Corporation, on 30.6.2024. After his retirement, a sum of ₹2,48,060/- was recovered from retiral dues of the petitioner, pursuant to orders dated 23.6.2021 and 14.8.2024. Thus feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached this Court challenging the recovery order. (3) It is contended that petitioner was a Group ‘C’ employee, therefore, in view of the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih, reported as (2015) 4 SCC 334, recovery is not permissible, if the concerned employee is not in any manner responsible for such excess payment. Learned Counsel for the petitioner relies upon a judgment rendered by Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No. 245 of 2022 and submits that this writ petition can also be decided in terms of the judgment dated 4.4.2024, rendered in Special Appeal No. 245 of 2022. (4) Mr. Lalit Samant, learned Counsel for the respondents, submits that petitioner had taken loan of ₹5,32,600/- from Uttarakhand State Road Transport Corporation Employees Cooperative Loan Society Ltd, Dehradun. However, he submits that, as per his instructions, 2026:UHC:2562 petitioner has repaid the loan on 23.5.2025. Thus he submits that there are no outstanding dues of the Corporation against the petitioner. He also concedes that the issue involved in the present case is identical to the one decided in Special Appeal No. 245 of 2022. (5) Having regard to facts and circumstances of the case and also in view of concession made by Mr. Lalit Samant, this writ petition is decided in terms of the judgment dated 4.4.2024, rendered in Special Appeal No. 245 of 2022. Respondents are directed to clear all pending dues of the petitioner within three months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order. (Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 9.4.2026 Pr PRABODH KUMAR Digitally signed by PRABODH KUMAR DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e61af3aeab198 d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB588052DF6FCA 58C67F3C91957BE53, cn=PRABODH KUMAR Date: 2026.04.09 14:14:13 +05'30' 2026:UHC:2562