ORDER :

Saurabh Lavania, J.

1. Heard Sri M.K. Dixit, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rajesh Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

2. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the office memorandum dated 13.09.2000 (Annexure no. 1 to the writ petition) whereby his representation with regard to recovery of Rs. 7020.50/-, has been rejected. The petitioner has also challenged the recovery order/letter dated 12.05.1999, pursuance to which the process of recovery was initiated against the petitioner.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Seenchpal (Patrol), in the Irrigation and Planning Division of Irrigation Department at Barelli. Thereafter in the year 1969, the petitioner was promoted on the post of lhap i;Zos{kd (Amin) at Balrampur. In the year 1974, the petitioner was transferred from Balrampur to Tubewell Division, Bahraich and he remained posted at Bahraich till 1983. Thereafter, he was transferred from Tubewell Division Bahraich to Tubewell Division, Faizabad and he remained posted at Faizabad till November 1990. In the month of December 1990, the petitioner was promoted