Ut of Jammu and Kashmir and Ors v. Sadiq Hussain and Others

ORDER

12.11.2025

¶1The issue involved in all these petitions is identical as such, the same are being disposed of by this common judgment.

¶2In WP(C) No. 2602/2025, the petitioners have impugned an Order dated 20.06.2024 passed by the learned Central

Administrative Tribunal, Jammu (hereinafter to be referred as >the Tribunal?), whereby the Transferred Application No. 8254/2021, titled <Ram Lal and others vs. Union Territory of J&K and others= has been allowed by quashing the order in respect of recovery of excess amount, paid erroneously, from the respondents has been set aside and the petitioners have been directed not to recover any amount from the salary or pensionary benefits of the respondents.

¶3In WP(C) No. 1948/2025, the petitioners have impugned the Order dated 20.06.2024 passed by the learned Tribunal, whereby Transferred Application No. 2788/2020, titled <Kuldeep Kumar vs. Union Territory of J&K and others= has been allowed by quashing the order in respect of recovery of excess amount, paid erroneously, from the respondent has been set aside and the petitioners have been directed not to recover any amount from the salary or pensionary benefits of the respondent.

¶4In WP(C) No. 1523/2025, the petitioners have impugned Tribunal, whereby the O.A No. 1347/2021, titled <Arjun Kumar and others vs. Union Territory of J&K and others= has been allowed by quashing the order in respect of

recovery of excess amount, paid erroneously, from the respondents has been set aside and the petitioners have been directed not to recover any amount from the salary or pensionary benefits of the respondents.

¶5In WP(C) No. 1808/2025, the petitioners have impugned Tribunal, whereby O.A No. 428/2021, titled <Madan Lal and others Union Territory of J&K and others= has been allowed by quashing the order in respect of recovery of excess amount, paid erroneously, from the respondents has been set aside and the petitioners have been directed not to recover any amount from the salary or pensionary benefits of the respondents.

¶6In WP(C) No. 1829/2025, the petitioners have impugned Tribunal, whereby O.A. No. 617/2021, titled <Ramesh Lal and others vs. Union Territory of J&K and others= has been allowed by quashing the order in respect of recovery of excess amount, paid erroneously, from the respondents has been set aside and the petitioners have been directed not to recover any amount from the salary or pensionary benefits of the respondents.

¶7In WP(C) No. 2061/2025, the petitioners have impugned Tribunal, whereby Transferred Application No. 292/2022, titled <Mohd Sadiq Hussain and others vs. Union Territory of J&K and others= has been allowed by quashing the order in respect of recovery of excess amount, paid erroneously, from the respondents has been set aside and the petitioners have been directed not to recover any amount from the salary or pensionary benefits of the respondents.

¶8Mrs. Monika Kohli, learned Sr. AAG, submits that the Coordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C)1114/2025, titled, UT of J&K and others vs. Kaku Ram decided on

16.10.2025, has considered the identical controversy.

¶9We have heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the order impugned.

¶10A perusal of the order impugned reveals that the learned Tribunal has quashed the order in respect of recovery to be affected from the respondents by placing reliance upon the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in State of Punjab vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) Air 2015 SC 696 and Thomas Daniel Vs. State of Kerala and others 2022 Live Law (SC) 438.

¶11A Coordinate Bench of this Court in WP(C) 1114/2025, titled, UT of J&K and others vs. Kaku Ram decided on

16.10.2025, has rejected the contention of the petitioners in respect of validity of the order directing recovery of excess amount paid to respondent therein erroneously. The judgment in case titled UT of J&K and others vs. Kaku Ram was followed in UT of J&K and others vs. Ram Pal and others decided on 20.10.2025.

¶12In view of the above, we do not find any illegality in the order passed by the learned Tribunal. The writ petitions are, accordingly, dismissed.

(RAJNESH OSWAL) (ARUN PALLI) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE JAMMU:

12.11.2025 Karam Chand

Whether the order is speaking:

Whether the order is reportable: Yes/No

HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Uploaded on: 18.11.2025 CJ Court: c/w WP(C) No. 1948/2025 WP(C) No. 1523/2025 WP(C) No. 1808/2025 WP(C) No. 1829/2025 WP(C) No. 2061/2025 UT of J&K and others …Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s) Through: Mrs. Monika Kohli, Sr. AAG v/s Ram Lal and others …. Respondent(s) Through: Ms. Himani Khajuria, Advocate vice Mr. Ankur Sharma, Advocate Mr. Qayoom Choudhary, Advocate Mr. Rupinder Singh, Advocate Mr. Abhinav Sharma, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Abhirash Sharma, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE.