Mihir Kumar Jha, J.

1. Heard Mr.Shivendra Kishore, learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the State as also for the Accountant General.

2. The petitioner in fact assails a communication sent by the Directorate of Statistics and Evaluation, Planning and Development Department, to the Accountant General, Bihar, wherein a sum of Rs. 1,21,517.35 paise was sought to be shown as excess amount paid to the petitioner and hence, deductible from the amount of gratuity payable to the petitioner.

3. The submission of Mr. Shivendra Kishore, learned counsel for the petitioner, is that such an order came as a bolt from the blue to the petitioner, inasmuch as before subjecting to such a huge recovery from the gratuity, the authorities had never given any notice and/or an opportunity to show cause to petitioner against the proposed recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,21,517.35 paise. To that extent learned counsel for the petitioner would rely on the statement made in paragraph 19 of the writ application and would refer to paragraph-17 of the counter affidavit wherein there is no denial to this fact.

4. Counsel for the State, on the other hand, would submit that since the facts are