HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 10167 of 2026 Court No. - 52 HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard Mr. Kamal Kumar Kesherwani, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. 2. This petition has been filed with a prayer to quash the order dated 09.12.2025 issued by Respondent No. 4, District Basic Education Officer, District- Pilibhit, and the letter dated 01.06.2026 issued by Respondent No. 6, Manager, Janta Junior High School, Udaykaranpur, Puranpur, District- Pilibhit, whereby recovery of Rs. 1,55,375/- has been sought from the petitioner. 3. On 16.07.2026, the following order was passed:- "Heard Mr. Kamal Kumar Kesherwani, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shailendra Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned recovery order dated 09.12.2025 has been issued after nine years of the retirement of the petitioner, there being no fraud or misrepresentation on his part. That too, without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Therefore, the same is arbitrary in view of Rafiq Masih (supra) and is liable to be quashed. Learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents prays for and is granted ten days' time to seek instructions on the following issues:- (i) Whether the petitioner has given any undertaking at the time of fixation of salary; (ii) Whether the petitioner has misrepresented or played fraud in obtaining the order of fixation of salary; (iii) Whether the petitioner was put to notice before proceedings for recovery; (iv) The fact that in the present case, the petitioner has been compulsory retired, therefore, whether the judgments of Rafiq Masih (supra) and Jagdish (supra) would be applicable or not. Put up this case on 27.07.2026 as fresh." 4. In compliance with the aforesaid order, instructions have been placed by Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Kamal Kumar Kesherwani Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Mohan Singh .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 5 Others .....Respondent(s) means of filing a short counter affidavit, wherein the queries of the Court have been answered at page 6 of the counter affidavit. 5. This Court finds that the queries of the Court have not been answered in a proper manner. There is nothing on record to show that any undertaking was given by the petitioner at the time of fixation of salary or any fraud / misrepresentation was played by him, or that the petitioner was put to notice prior to recovery. 6. In view of the settled position of law, impugned order has been passed in violation of the principles as laid down in the judgment of State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih (Whitewasher) And Others, reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334. 7. In view of the aforesaid, the impugned order dated 09.12.2025 issued by the respondent no.4 as well as letter dated 01.06.2026 issued by the respondent no.6 are set-aside. The matter is remanded back to respondent no.4-District Basic Education Officer, Pilibhit to decide afresh, strictly in accordance with law, by means of reasoned and speaking order, after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment. 8. Accordingly, the present writ petition is allowed. September 17, 2026 Jitendra/- WRIA No. 10167 of 2026 2 (Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad