2026:CGHC:9110 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1445 of 2025

1 - Bedu Ram Jangde S/o Late Shri Lain Das Jangde Aged About 66 Years Subedar (M) Retired From The Officer Of Commandant, Chhattisgarh Armed Force, 2nd Battalion, Sakri, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, R/o Yadunandan Nagar, Bilsapur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner Versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Home, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur Chhattisgarh

2 - Joint Director Accounts Treasury And Pension Bilaspur Division, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

3 - Director General Of Police Police Headquarters, Headquarters, Raipur Chhattisgarh

4 - Additional Director General Chhattisgarh Armed Force Police Headquarters, Raipur Chhattisgarh

5 - Commandant 2nd Battalion Chhattisgarh Armed Force, Sakri, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Ajay Kumrani, Advocate For Respondents-State : Mr. Soumya Rai, Dy. Government Advocate SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

ORDER ON BOARD

20/02 /2026

1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition raising grievance that the respondent authorities have willingly withheld a sum of Rs. 5,10,001/- on the ground that the petitioner is paid excess salary during his service period and prayed for following reliefs:-

“10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records of the case for its kind perusal.

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction and quash/set-aside the impugned order/communication dated 10.09.2024 (Annexure P/1) with respect to recovery to be made by the respondents.

10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction and direct the respondent authorities to fix the pay of the petitioner as per last pay drawn and thereafter, release the retiral dues i.e. Gratuity, Pension and other benefits due to the petitioner along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum.

10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other writ/writs, order/orders, relief/relief's in favour of the petitioner, which the Hon'ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts and circumstances of the case, including awarding of the costs to the petitioner.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the reply filed by the Respondents/State, there is no averment that the excess payment made to the petitioner is on account of misrepresentation or fraud committed by him upon the respondents. He contended that the petitioner is a Class – 2 Employee, if for any reason due to mistake of the officials of respondent authorities, any excess amount is paid to the petitioner towards excess salary, it could not be recovered from the retiral dues of petitioner. He also submits that till the petitioner is in service, no notice or letter has been issued to him stating that he was paid excess salary. In support of his contention, he places reliance upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab & Ors Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) & Ors, reported in (2015) 4 SCC 334

3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the Respondents/State would submit that the petitioner was paid excess amount of salary because of wrong fixation of pay. The petitioner is holding the post of Subedar (M), which is a Class – II post and therefore, petitioner would not come under the shelter of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Rafiq Masih (Supra). Petitioner has submitted undertaking for refund of excess amount paid to him.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record.

5. When question is posed to the learned counsel for the Respondents/State as to what is the period in which, the petitioner was paid excess amount towards salary due to wrong fixation of pay, he submits that according to the pleadings made in reply, the period is from 2008 till the date of retirement i.e. 31.05.2019. From the