KHARAK SINGH BORA v. DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY
WPSS/1363/2026 · 2026-05-25
Manoj Kumar Tiwari
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 6039 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 6039 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2026:UHC:4109 SL. No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s
order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS
WPSS 1363/2026
Hon’ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.
Mr. Deep Prakash Bhatt, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. K.N. Joshi, Deputy AG, for the State. (2) Petitioner retired from the post of Livestock Extension Officer from Department of Animal Husbandry on
31.8.2025. After his retirement, a sum of ₹3,47,608 was recovered from the amount payable as gratuity to him, as is revealed from Pension Payment Order issued on
8.12.2025. Thus feeling aggrieved by the recovery made by the competent authority, petitioner has approached this Court.
(3)
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner neither played fraud nor misrepresented facts for getting excess amount released in his favour and whatever amount was paid to petitioner was as per the orders passed by the competent authority. He submits that in view of the law declared by Hon’ble Apex Court, recovery cannot be made from retiral dues of the petitioner. He further submits that petitioner was not given any notice or opportunity of hearing before passing the recovery order. It is further contended that petitioner retired from a Group C post and as per law declared by Hon’ble Apex Court, recovery is not permissible from Group C employees.
(4)
Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has made a representation highlighting his grievance. Representation, which is enclosed as
2026:UHC:4109 Annexure-5 to the writ petition, was reportedly made on 28.1.2026. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that competent authority be asked to take decision on the said representation. Learned State Counsel assures that decision on petitioner’s representation, if not already taken, shall be taken within six weeks.
(5) Writ petition is, accordingly,
disposed of by directing the competent authority to take decision on petitioner’s representation, as per law, within six weeks from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order.
(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.)
25.5.2026 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=3a082a00a95aff911a9559743af8f21c50602ff6eae4e61af3aeab198d462503, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=0DC111E8D8CA66E16B940EFDF806ACCC1AB588052DF6FCA58C67F3C91957BE53 , cn=PRABODH KUMAR Date: 2026.05.25 16:44:29 +05'30'
2026:UHC:4109