01Facts
The petitioners in these connected writ petitions were retired persons aggrieved by orders seeking recovery of alleged excess payments.
¶ 3Their counsel submitted that the petitioners had not given undertakings permitting recovery and relied on prior decisions of the Uttarakhand High Court addressing the issue.
¶ 3–5The State did not dispute the position advanced by the petitioners.
¶ 3–502Issues
i.Whether recovery of alleged excess payments could be pursued against the retired petitioners, who said they had given no undertaking permitting such recovery.
¶ 4ii.Whether the connected petitions should be disposed of in accordance with the cited prior judgments.
¶ 4–603Law Applied
The Court relied on the Division Bench judgment dated 19.08.2026 in WPSB No. 541 of 2026, the Coordinate Bench judgment dated 18.09.2025 in the batch led by WPSS No. 335 of 2023, and its judgment dated 13.10.2026 in WPSS No. 1276 of 2024.
¶ 6The Court did not separately set out the legal principles from those decisions or cite any statute.
¶ 4–604Reasoning
The petitioners’ challenge concerned recovery of alleged excess payments from retired persons, and they asserted that they had given no undertaking authorising recovery.
¶ 3–6The State did not dispute their reliance on the prior decisions.
¶ 3–6In those circumstances, the Court disposed of the petitions in accordance with the cited judgments, without separately analysing the recovery issue or elaborating on the precedents’ reasoning.
¶ 3–605Holding
The Court disposed of all connected petitions in terms of the cited judgments.
¶ 6–7The Court directed the respondents to redress the petitioners’ grievances within six weeks.
¶ 6–7Original Court PDF
RAMESH SINGHvsSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
