JUDGMENT 1. - In this case, the petitioner who is a retired employee is challenging the order Annexure-5 dated 30.4.2001 whereby the recovery of Rs.29,428/- has been ordered to be made from the amount of gratuity by the Treasury Officer. 2. In this case, notices were issued by this Court on 24.2.2005. Thereafter on various occasions this case was listed in the Court but no reply has been filed. The Coordinate Bench of this Court has passed the following order on 12.7.2007 : "In this case a notice for show cause as to why the petition be not admitted and heard finally at this stage was issued on 24th February 2005. Nearly two and half years thereafter and even after seeking number of adjournments, the reply has not yet been filed. Learned Dy. Government advocate Mr. R. Dave frankly states that despite making all efforts, the Officer incharge concerned has not supplied necessary information nor taken steps for filing of the reply. There appears no reason to adjourn the matter any further for reply. The right of filing reply is, therefore, closed. In view of the order dated 24.02.2005, it appears appropriate to take up this matter for final disposal at this stage. List this matter for final disposal on 18th July 2007." 3. Upon perusal of the aforesaid order, it is clear that right of filing reply was closed. Thereafter, on 1.8.2007, Mr. O.P. Boob, Govt. Counsel appeared and submitted before the Court that he may be permitted to file reply. Therefore, again an opportunity was granted to the respondents that they may file reply along with an application mentioning the ground of delay. 4. It is very strange that till today no application has been filed although the reply without application has been filed but no application for condonation of delay and for recalling of the order dated 12.7.2007 has been filed, then obviously, the order passed by this Court to close the right to file reply is still in existence. 5. In my opinion, when right of filing reply is closed then all the pleadings of the writ petition is required to be accepted in toto. 5. In my opinion, when right of filing reply is closed then all the pleadings of the writ petition is required to be accepted in toto. Therefore, on the basis of the pleadings of the writ petition, it is obvious that there was no outstanding against the petitioner for which any recovery was to be made from the amount of gratuity but it has illegally been made from the amount of gratuity without explaining either to the employee or to this Court. Therefore, the said recovery is totally illegal and contrary to the basic principles of law. 6. Accordingly, the order dated 30.4.2001 Annexure-5 whereby the recovery is ordered to be made from gratuity is hereby quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to release the recovered amount to the petitioner within a period of fifteen days from the date of certified copy of this order along with 9% interest per annum from the date when it was to be paid to the petitioner. 7. The writ petition is allowed in above terms with no order as to cost.Writ petition Allowed *******