Hon’ble B.K. Narayana, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

2. By means of the present writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 7.9.2006 (Annexure-4 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent No. 3 by which an amount of Rs. 24,710/-, which was paid in excess to the salary, which the petitioner was entitled to receive, has been directed to be recovered from him.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation while working on the post of Pharmacist on 31.1.2006. Since the petitioner’s retiral benefits were not being paid, he approached the respondent No. 4 for redressal of his grievances who, by his letter dated 17.3.2006, requested the respondent No. 2 to release 90% of the G.P.F. amount in favour of the petitioner.

4. It appears that another letter dated 21.6.2006 was issued by the respondent No. 4 to the respondent No. 3 seeking parawise reply to the queries contained therein. Although the said letter contains an endorsement that a copy of the said order was forwarded to the petitioner also but, according to the