1 CGHC010397922019 2026:CGHC:35879 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 10143 of 2019  Satyanarayan Mishra S/o Late Shri Pancharam Mishra, Aged About 59 Years, Retd. Sub Inspector, R/o Sagardeep Colony, Ameri, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary , Home Department, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2. Director General Of Police, Headquarter Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3. Inspector General Of Police Bilaspur Range, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 4. Superintendent Of Police Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 5. Superintendent Of Police Narayanpur, District Narayanpur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioner :- Mr. Shashi Kumar Kushwaha, Advocate. For State :- Mr. H.A.P.S. Bhatia, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 13/08/2026 1. This petition has been filed against the orders dated 09.01.2014 (Annexure P/3) & 18.09.2015 (Annexure P/4) whereby ₹2,63,997/- has been recovered from the petitioner. ANKIT KUMAR SINGH Digitally signed by ANKIT KUMAR SINGH 2 2. Mr. Shashi Kumar Kushwaha, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that recovery orders dated 09.01.2014 (Annexure P/3) & 18.09.2015 (Annexure P/4) are liable to be set aside as without affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner orders were passed. 3. Mr. H.A.P.S. Bhatia, learned State counsel, would oppose the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner and support the impugned order. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions made herein above and gone through the records precisely. 5. Since there is a violation of principles of natural justice as the impugned recovery orders dated 09.01.2014 (Annexure P/3) & 18.09.2015 (Annexure P/4) were passed without affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the impugned recovery orders dated 09.01.2014 (Annexure P/3) & 18.09.2015 (Annexure P/4) are liable to be and is hereby set aside. However, respondents / competent authority is at liberty to pass fresh order after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties. 6. Consequently, this writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated herein above. Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ankit