2025:CGHC:56860 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 9808 of 2019 Pratap Singh Tirkey S/o Late Shri Johan Tirkey Aged About 63 Years, Retired Head Constable No. 42, Village Basadih, Post Saraipali, Tahsil Bagicha, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh, District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI DN: cn=AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, ... Petitioner.

ou=HIGH COURT, o=HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN Versus Date: 2025.11.25 10:47:53 +0530

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Home / Police, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Police Station And Post Rakhi, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2 - Inspector General Of Police (IGP) Office Of Inspector General Of Police, Ambikapur District Surguja Chhattisgarh, District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh

3 - Superintendent Of Police (SP) Office Of Superintendent Of Police (Sp) District Jashpur Chhattisgarh, District : Jashpur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents.

For Petitioner : Mr. K. R. Nair, Advocate.

For Respondent/State : Mr. Amandeep Singh, Panel Lawyer.

SB : Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order on Board

24.11.2025

1) This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for the following reliefs:-

"10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to set aside the recovery of Rs.5,36,531/- made from the gratuity of petitioner and the respondent authorities may please be directed to refund the entire amount of recovery to the petitioner with interest @ 18%

per annum.

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to pay cost and expenses of this litigation.

10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may further be please to issue any other appropriate orders or directions to the respondents in the interest of justice in favour of the petitioner."

2) The key facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Constable in the Police Department in the year 1986 and after completion of services he was retired on 31.12.2018. During his services, on account of negligence in the discharge of duties departmental enquiry was held against him and other police personnel and the Authority imposed the punishment of reducing the petitioner to the minimum of the pay scale for a period of 3 year by order dated 28.02.1998 (Annexure-P/2). However, during services said punishment was not implemented by the Department. Subsequently, after retirement, the recovery order for amount of Rs.5,36,531/- has been passed against the petitioner for the excess payment on account of said punishment. Hence, this petition.

3) Mr. K. R. Nair, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that any recovery is not permissible after the retirement as the petitioner has served the duties as Class-III employee and retired from the post of Head Constable. He also submits that recovery of such

huge amount after retirement is deprivation of his means and livelihood. He also places reliance in the matter of State of Punjab

Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer)¹ and prays to allow the petition.

4) Apart from the above, learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that, as per information received, the amount has already been recovered and adjustment has been made by the Authorities from the retiral dues of the petitioner.

5) Shri Amandeep Singh, Panel Lawyer for the respondent/State would oppose the prayer of the petitioner and submits that as the adjustment of amount has been made from the gratuity so the petitioner may avail remedy under the Gratuity Act. He also places in the matters of High Court of Punjab and Haryana and Ors vs. Jagdev Singh² and Chandi Prasad Uniyal and Ors Vs. State of Uttarakhand and Ors³ and prays to dismiss the petition.

6) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7) Recently in the matter of Jogeshwar Sahoo & Ors Vs. the District Judge, Cuttack and Ors⁴, an issue came up before the Hon'ble Supreme Court that whether recovery of amount extended to