Madhya Pradesh High Court
Salil Dhagat vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 16 September, 2025
1 WP-12451-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK JAIN
ON THE 16th OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 12451 of 2024
SALIL DHAGAT
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Anshul Tiwari - Advocate for petitioner.
Shri Anshuman Swami - Government Advocate for respondents/State.
ORDER
By way of this petition, the petitioner has put to challenge, the recovery ordered from him vide Annexure P/1 dated 29.01.2024 to the tune of Rs.16,88,958/- which includes principal amount of Rs.11,28,880/- and interest of Rs.5,55,078/-.
2. The recovery is challenged by the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner stood retired on 31.07.2022 and the recovery has been ordered against him after his retirement on 29.01.2024 and, therefore, the recovery after retirement, is unsustainable.
3. It is argued that the petitioner had no role in the alleged erroneous payment and it was not based on any suppression or fraud on the part of the petitioner.
4 . Per contra, prayer is opposed by the learned counsel for the State on the ground that the petitioner was erroneously granted the benefit of second Signature Not Verified Signed by: PREM SHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 18-09-2025 18:43:47 2 WP-12451-2024 financial upgradation w.e.f. 01.04.2006 and this was detected at the time his pension papers were sent when his retirement was near. It was detected that he had been granted financial upgradation under order of Director, Farmer Welfare (respondent No.3) which was the incompetent authority and, therefore, the State Government decided to review the financial upgradation granted to the petitioner and upon review selection committee being convened on 26.08.2021, it was found that the benefit of financial upgradation was erroneously granted to the petitioner as he did not fulfil the benchmark criteria when the said financial upgradation was granted to the petitioner in year 2006.
5. From perusal of the rival contentions and on perusal of the documents placed on record by the rival parties, it is clear that the petitioner was granted upgradation under order of the Director, Farmer Welfare, Madhya Pradesh, who was obviously a responsible authority in the State Government and an authority senior to the petitioner. He continued to draw the benefit of financial upgradation when just before retirement pension papers were sent to the State Government it was detected that the second financial upgradation has been granted under order of Director and thereafter the State Government decided to review the financial upgradation granted to the petitioner.
6. Till the forwarding of pension papers to the State Government, there was no dispute or quarrel about the grant of financial upgradation benefits by the petitioner which he was enjoying from 01.04.2006 onwards and only at the time of preparation of pension papers, that the State Government decided to Signature Not Verified Signed by: PREM SHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 18-09-2025 18:43:47 3 WP-12451-2024 review the selection committee proceedings and then found that the petitioner was not entitled for financial upgradation.
7. The petitioner is a retired Class II officer and he has drawn the benefits from 01.04.2006 which is for a period 16 years prior to his retirement.
8. Therefore, the petitioner being a retired Class-II employee, therefore, in view of paragraph 18 (iii) of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of Punjab and others vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) and others, (2015) 4 SCC 334, the recovery from a retired employee, when the excess payment has been made for a period in excess of five years before issuance of recovery order, cannot be stated to be justified.
9. Therefore, the recovery for five years prior to date of superannuation of the petitioner is upheld. In other words, recovery from 01.08.2017 to 31.07.2022 is upheld and recovery from 01.04.2006 till 31.07.2017 is set aside. Interest on the entire amount is set aside.
10. Let the recoverable amount i.e. principal amount between 01.8.2017 till 31.7.2022 be calculated and the excess amount be recovered be refunded back to the petitioner within sixty days, failing which it will carry interest at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of this order.
11. Petition is partly allowed and disposed of.
(VIVEK JAIN) JUDGE psm Signature Not Verified Signed by: PREM SHANKAR MISHRA Signing time: 18-09-2025 18:43:47