1 2026:CGHC:18922 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5331 of 2022 1 - Dheeraj Kumar Sahu S/o Late D.L. Sahu Aged About 32 Years Working As Assistant Grade Iii In The Office Of Deputy Director, Agriculture , Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary , Agriculture Development And Farmer Welfare And Bio Technology, Department , Atal Nagar Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director Agriculture Indrawati Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Joint Director Agriculture, Division Durg , District Durg Chhattisgarh. 4 - Deputy Director Agriculture , Division Durg, Near Saksharta Bhawan Primises Civil Line Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner/s : Shri Somkant Verma, Advocate. For Respondent/ State : Shri Amandeep Singh, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 24.04.2026 NIRMALA RAO 2 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following reliefs:- “(i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash order of recovery passed by the respondent no.3 against the petitioner sum of Rs 2,27,726/- and also direct the respondent authority to refund recovered amount to the petitioner with normal rate of interest. (ii) Any other relief which the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may please also be granted.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was appointed on compassionate grounds to the post of Assistant Grade-III vide order dated 2.4.2012. He would contend that under the conditions of the appointment order, the petitioner was required to pass Hindi Typing Examination within a period of two years. He would submit that though the petitioner did not pass Hindi typing examination within the stipulated period, his services were regularized vide order dated 24.3.2018 with effect from 24.2.2014 and monetary benefits were also provided from the said date. He would submit that the respondent authorities without affording any opportunity of hearing issued an order of recovery of Rs.2,27,726/- in 72 installments of Rs.3,200/- per month on the ground that the services of the petitioner were regularized due to mistake and the petitioner failed to obtain Hindi typing examination within given period. He would submit that there was no misrepresentation on the part of the petitioner and he is a class-III employee and it would be very difficult for the petitioner to refund the said amount. He would pray to quash the order (Annexure-P/1). 3 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He would submit that the petitioner failed to fulfill the required criteria for regularization of his services. He would submit that the petitioner was required to pass Hindi typing examination within a period of two years from the date of appointment and this fact was overlooked by the respondents while passing order of regularization in favour of the petitioner and the benefits attached to the post were extended due to mistake and when this fact was detected, the Deputy Director Agriculture, District Durg passed order of recovery dated 26.11.2021. He would submit that the petition deserves to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents present on record. 5. Admittedly, the petitioner was appointed on compassionate grounds to the post of Assistant Grade-III vide order dated 2.4.2012. The petitioner was required to qualify Hindi typing examination within the period of two years, which was a basic requirement for regularization of his services. Though the petitioner failed to comply with this condition but his services were regularized vide order dated 24.3.2018 with effect from 24.2.2014 and the petitioner was extended monetary benefits too. 6. It is apparent from the documents and the pleadings made in the writ petition and the return that there was no misrepresentation on the part of the petitioner. The order of regularization was passed by the State authorities and the benefits were extended accordingly. It is 4 also not in dispute that the petitioner is a Class-III employee and it would be very difficult for him to refund huge amount of Rs.2,27,726/-. 7. Taking into consideration the above-discussed facts, the order Annexure-P/1 is hereby quashed. The amount recovered from the account of the petitioner shall be refunded forthwith. 8. With the aforesaid observation(s), this petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi