Allahabad High Court
SMT. UMA SRIVASTAVA (RETD. LECTURER)versusSTATE OF U.P. AND 6 OTHERS
- Decided
Holding
The Court disposed of the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to submit a representation before the respondents regarding the alleged repayment of the loan.
Summary
Petitioner Smt. Uma Srivastava, a retired lecturer, filed a writ petition challenging a consequential order dated 26 September 2025 that cited a recovery of a loan of Rs. 40,000, which she claims has already been repaid. She did not contest the earlier notice dated 22 October 2024 nor the calculation made by the Office of the Accountant General, Uttar Pradesh. The petitioner sought an opportunity to make a representation before the respondents to demonstrate that the loan had been repaid and the calculation was incorrect. The Court considered the petition and, without delving into the merits of the repayment claim, granted the petitioner liberty to submit a representation to the respondents. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of, allowing the petitioner to approach the respondents for a review of the recovery order.
Issues considered
- Whether the consequential order of recovery dated 26-09-2025 can be challenged without contesting the prior notice and calculation.
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to a liberty to make a representation before the respondents to contest the loan repayment calculation.
Subjects
- loan recovery
- writ petition
- representation
- civil procedure
- court order
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 6382 of 2026
Smt. Uma Srivastava (Retd. Lecturer)
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. And 6 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Abhishek Kumar Srivastava, Anamika
Srivastava
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Ashok Kumar Pandey, C.S.C.
Court No. - 32
HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.
1. Heard Sri Abhishek Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri
Santosh Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for State-Respondents and Sri
Ashok Kumar Pandey, Advocate for Respondents-2 and 7.
2. Petitioner has challenged only consequential order, i.e., a citation of
recovery dated 26.09.2025 without making any challenge to notice dated
22.10.2024 addressed to petitioner alongwith calculation of recovery
determined by the Office of Accountant General, U.P. at Allahabad that
petitioner who admittedly has taken a loan of Rs. 40,000/- has not been
repaid though learned counsel for petitioner has made a statement that it was
repaid.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner further submits that an opportunity be
granted to petitioner to submit a representation before concerned respondent
and in case he is able to show that calculation is not correct and loan amount
was already paid concerned respondent will look into the matter.
4. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with liberty as prayed for.
May 7, 2026
AK
(Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
AWADESH KUMAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…