1 / 3 CGHC010310012026 2026:CGHC:38744 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6109 of 2026 Smt. Ramshila Thakur W/o Shri Rupesh Thakur Aged About 39 Years Posted As Patwari P. H. No. 05 And 06, Village And R I C Sanaud, Tehsil Gurur, District Balod C. G. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through- Its Secretary Dept, Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan P. S. And Post Rakhi, Nawa Raipur Atal Nagar Raipur District Raipur C.G. 2 - The Collector Balod District Balod C. G. 3 - Sub Divisional Office ( Revenue) Sub Division, Gurur, District Balod C. G. 4 - The Tehsildar Gurur, District Balod C. G. 5 - The Joint Director Treasure, Account And Pension, Durg Division, Durg C. G. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Ms. Juhi Anguriya, Advocate For State/Respondent : Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiya, GA (Hon’ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru) Order on Board 01/09/2026 1. The petitioner has preferred the present writ petition questioning the legality of the impugned memo dated 06.02.2026 (Annexure P/1), whereby recovery of an amount of Rs.3,56,255/- has been directed from ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2026.09.02 17:43:18 +0530 2 / 3 the petitioner on account of alleged excess payment arising out of revision of pay fixation. 2. On the last date of hearing, a query was raised by this Court as to whether, prior to issuance of the impugned memo dated 06.02.2026, any notice was issued to the petitioner or any opportunity of hearing was afforded to her. 3. In response to the aforesaid query, learned State counsel, on instructions, submits that no notice was issued to the petitioner and no opportunity of hearing was afforded to her prior to issuance of the impugned memo dated 06.02.2026. 4. In view of the aforesaid submission made by learned State counsel, it is evident that the impugned recovery has been ordered without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The impugned action, therefore, suffers from violation of the principles of natural justice and cannot be sustained. 5. It is trite that whenever an administrative action entails adverse civil consequences, strict adherence to the principles of natural justice is indispensable unless specifically excluded by statute. A recovery order affecting the pecuniary rights of an employee undoubtedly visits him with civil consequences and, therefore, cannot be sustained if passed in violation of the rule of audi alteram partem. Compliance with the principles of natural justice is not an empty formality but a substantive safeguard against arbitrary exercise of power. 6. Accordingly, the impugned memo dated 06.02.2026 (Annexure P/1), 3 / 3 including the consequential recovery directed thereunder, is hereby set aside. However, this order shall not preclude the respondents from taking appropriate action in accordance with law. Liberty is reserved in favour of the respondents to issue a proper notice to the petitioner, furnish the basis and details of the proposed recovery, afford her reasonable opportunity to submit her reply and an opportunity of hearing, and thereafter take a fresh decision by passing a reasoned and speaking order, strictly in accordance with law. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the alleged excess payment or the entitlement of the respondents to effect recovery. All such questions are left open to be considered by the competent authority in accordance with law after following the principles of natural justice. 8. With the aforesaid liberty, the writ petition stands allowed and disposed of. SD/- SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE ashu