HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD Sanjay Kumar .....Petitioner(s)

Versus The State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Respondent(s)

Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Kailash Prakash Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C.

Court No. - 6 HON'BLE PRAKASH PADIA, J.

1. The order dated 29.03.2025 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police (Cyber) Commissionerate Gautam Budh Nagar/respondent No.3 by which the salary of the petitioner has been revised and order of recovery has been passed is under challenge.

2. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that by the aforesaid order, salary of the petitioner has been revised from 01.12.2008. It is argued that the petitioner has been retired from the post of Sub Inspector Civil Police on 31.08.2025. It is argued that the before passing the aforesaid order, no notice or opportunity of hearing has been provided to the petitioner. It is argued that recovery could not be sought from the petitioner for excess payment made during service period after lapse 17 years back. It is argued that nothing has been stated in the order impugned that any fraud or misrepresentation has been made by the petitioner at any point of time or at the time of re-fixation of