2026:JHHC:11940 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S). No. 763 of 2022 ---------- Vinod Kumar Singh, aged about 60 years, son of late Sikendar Singh, resident of Flat No. A-29, Road No. 2, Maman Bidya Mandir, P.O. Bhairwa, P.S. Muffisil, Dist. Hazaribagh. ………. Petitioner Versus 1. State of Jharkhand represented through Secretary, Human Resource Development Department, State of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, Dist. Ranchi. 2. Secretary, Human Resource Development Department, State of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, Dist. Ranchi. 3. Director, Secondary Education, Human Resource Development Department, State of Jharkhand, Project Building, P.O. & P.S. Dhurwa, Dist. Ranchi. 4. District Education Officer, Hazaribagh, P.O., P.S. and Dist. Hazaribagh. 5. Headmaster, Project Girls High School, Charhi, P.O. & P.S. Charhi, Dist. Hazaribagh. ………. Respondents. ---------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Tiwary, Advocate Mr. Ranjit Kumar Tiwari, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vishal Kr. Rai, AC to GA-IV ---------- 21/ 23.04.2026 The instant application has been preferred by the petitioner praying therein for quashing the order dated 15.06.2022, issued under letter No. 975, by the District Education Officer, Hazaribagh, whereby the concerned respondent has passed an order for deduction of Rs.92,540/- from retiral benefits of the petitioner, for depositing the same before the Income Tax Department for the fault of his own. 2. Briefly stated, the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher on 05.01.1982 at Project Girls High School, Pirtand at Giridih. Thereafter, he was transferred to Project Girls High School, Charhi in the year 1994 and after rendering a long period of service, retired from the service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.08.2021. 3. From perusal of the writ application and the counter-affidavit, it appears that when the petitioner moved before this Court for payment of retiral benefits, which has not been extended even after retirement of the petitioner, in the said case, the respondents filed counter-affidavit wherein an order has been annexed indicating therein that an amount of Rs.92,540/- will be deducted which has to be deposited before the Income Tax Department. 2026:JHHC:11940 2 4. Thereafter, an interlocutory application has been preferred by the petitioner for amending the prayer and also praying therein for quashing the letter dated 15.06.2022. 5. From the entire records, it appears that no any show-cause notice or any proceeding under Rule-43(b) of the Jharkhand Pension Rules has been initiated and all of a sudden, Rs.92,540/- has been deducted from the retiral benefits of the petitioner on the ground that while petitioner was posted as Incharge Headmaster during his working period i.e. from 2009- 10 to 2014-15, some income tax deduction was not made. However, as aforesaid, there is nothing on record to suggest that any procedure has been adopted by the respondents. 6. Counsel for the respondents very fairly submits that after retirement of the petitioner, when scrutiny was done it was found on the basis of a letter from Income Tax Department that Rs.92,540/- should have been deducted by the petitioner while he was In-charge Headmaster but he had not deposited. However, he could not demonstrate as to whether any show- cause notice was ever issued. Rather, he has accepted, inasmuch as, in the counter-affidavit there is no averment as to whether show-cause was given to the petitioner or not. 7. Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, since the petitioner retired in the year 2021 and as per the settled law; procedure has to be adopted before passing any order. The deduction might have been made due to the instruction of Income Tax Department but in any view of the matter, when an amount is to be deducted, proper procedure as per Service Code has to be adopted, which is absent in the instant case. 8. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 15.06.2022 is quashed. The respondents are directed to refund the recovered amount, if any, within a period of 10 weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. 9. In the result, this writ application is allowed. (Deepak Roshan, J.) 23rd April, 2026 kunal/- Uploaded on 04.05.2026