JABALPUR, India, Nov. 30 -- Madhya Pradesh High Court issued the following judgment/order on Oct. 30:

1. Instant intra Court appeal is preferred by State of M.P. and others assailing order dated 09.07.2024 passed by learned Single Judge in W.P. No.25469 of 2019, whereby the writ petition preferred by the respondent challenging the recovery from his retiral dues was allowed with a direction to refund the amount alongwith interest to the respondent.

2. Heard on I.A. No. 16136/2025, which is an application for condonation of delay occurred in filing the present appeal. As per office report the present appeal is barred by 317 days.

3. Considering the reasons assigned in the application, which is duly supported by the affidavit, application is allowed and the delay is hereby condoned.

4. Heard Shri S.S. Chauhan, Government Advocate on behalf of the appellants/State on the question of admission.

5. Respondent preferred the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assailing the recovery of sum of Rs. 7,91,905/- from his retiral dues on account of erroneous pay fixation and access payment made to him during his service period. The respondent was working on the post of Principal in the office of District Education Officer and superannuated on 28.02.2019. At the time of calculation of retiral benefits payable to the respondent, the department recovered Rs.7,91,905/- on the ground of excess payment due to wrong pay fixation by order dated 25.03.2019. The said order was challenged by the respondent by preferring the writ petition, which was allowed on 09.07.2024 by the learned Single Judge relying upon the judgment delivered by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab & State of Punjab & Ors. Vs. Rafique Masih (2015) 4 SCC 334 and the Full Bench of this Court in State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr. vs. Jagdish Prasad Dubey & Anr. in State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr. vs. Jagdish Prasad Dubey & Anr. reported in 2024 SCC OnLine MP 1567 . The learned Single Judge has further held that no recovery was permissible after the retirement on the ground of mistake committed in fixation of pay or excess payment of salary made erroneously. The learned Single Judge further held that the recovery was not permissible on the basis of the undertaking or in terms of Rule 65 of M.P. Civil Services Pension Rules, 1976. The petition was allowed and the direction was issued to refund the recovered amount alongwith interest @ 6% per annum from the date of recovery till date of payment and the pay fixation of the respondent/petitioner was maintained.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://mphc.gov.in/upload/jabalpur/MPHCJB/2025/WA/2475/WA_2475_2025_FinalOrder_30-10-2025_digi.pdf)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.