DHANIRAM YADU vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — WPS/1455/2022

Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 08th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010060342022

Filing Number

WPS/3373/2022

Filing Date

15-Feb-2022

Registration No

WPS/1455/2022

Registration Date

02-Mar-2022

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

SERVICE MATTERS ( 6 )

Sub-Category

RETIRAL BENEFITS. ( 601 )

Judicial Branch

Writ Section

Decision Date

08-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 05-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.DHANIRAM YADU

    Adv. SOMKANT VERMA,MANOJ CHAUHAN,MANOJ CHAUHAN, ,MANOJ CHAUHAN

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.

  2. 2.Deputy Director,

  3. 3.Divisional Joint Director,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 08-May-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan PandeyView PDF

    The Chhattisgarh High Court quashed the recovery order of Rs. 78,672/- issued against retired Social Education Organizer Dhaniram Yadu, finding it iniquitous under Supreme Court precedent in Rafiq Masih. The court held that recovery from Class-III retired employees without misrepresentation is harsh and unjustifiable, and directed refund of any recovered amount with 6% per annum interest. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 12-Jan-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh RajputView PDF

  4. 27-Jun-2022

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy

  5. 07-Mar-2022

    Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam KoshyView PDF

  6. 07-Mar-2022

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 15-Feb-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPS/1455/2022

casestatus.in Summary

The Chhattisgarh High Court quashed the recovery order of Rs. 78,672/- issued against retired Social Education Organizer Dhaniram Yadu, finding it iniquitous under Supreme Court precedent in Rafiq Masih. The court held that recovery from Class-III retired employees without misrepresentation is harsh and unjustifiable, and directed refund of any recovered amount with 6% per annum interest. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case