Judgment Heard counsel for the parties, 2. The petitioner in this writ application, has prayed for a direction on the respondents to pay the petitioner his retiral benefits including his pension, the amount of provident fund, difference of pay payable to him along with interest under various Heads and, also for quashing the letter dated 14.3.2002 (Annexure-4) issued by the office of the Accountant General (A&E))-II, Bihar and Jharkhand, Patna, whereby a direction was issued to the District Superintendent of Education, Garhwa to deduct certain amount from the petitioner's retiral benefits on the ground that excess payment was made to him. A further prayer has been made for quashing the letter dated 7.1.2004 (Annexure-6) issued by the District Superintendent of Education, Garhwa (Respondent No. 2), whereby the petitioner has been directed to deposit the excess amount paid to him purportedly on account of wrong fixation of his salary made in the year 1986. 3. Counsel for the petitioner acknowledges that the retiral benefits have been paid to the petitioner, though after delay of two years and that too, without recovery of any excess amount from his accumulated retiral benefits. Learned counsel however submits that though the petitioner was entitled to annual increments from the period specified, but he was not given such benefit thereof. Learned counsel submits further that the petitioner is also entitled to the grant of second ACP and consequential monetary benefits thereof, but he was not given any such benefit. Learned counsel adds further that the impugned letters whereby certain amount have been sought to be recovered from the petitioner, are illegal and cannot sustain in law as because, such orders have been passed admittedly after the retirement of the petitioner and that too, without issuing any prior notice to the petitioner to explain as to why recovery should not be made from him and on the further ground that the order has been passed without initiating any proceeding in terms of the Rule 43B of the Pension Rules. 4. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents in which the respondents have sought to explain that the entire admissible dues which were payable to the petitioner, were duly assessed under the various Heads and have been paid to him and the amount of provident fund has also been paid together with interest accrued thereon. 4. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents in which the respondents have sought to explain that the entire admissible dues which were payable to the petitioner, were duly assessed under the various Heads and have been paid to him and the amount of provident fund has also been paid together with interest accrued thereon. As regards the petitioner's grievance against the impugned orders purporting to recover some excess amount from the petitioner's retiral benefits, the stand taken by the respondent State is that such direction having been issued by the office of the Accountant General, the respondent State is bound to abide by the same. 5. From the counter-affidavit, it appears that before issuing the order for recovery of the amount from the petitioner on the ground of excess payment, the petitioner was neither given any prior notice to explain as to why such recovery should not be made, nor has any proceeding been initiated against him. It is settled law that no recovery of any amount can be made, unless a proceeding under Rule 43B of the Pension Rules is initiated. As such, both the impugned letters (Annexures-4 and 6) are hereby set aside. As regards the petitioner's claim for payment of annual increment and arrears thereof to which he was legitimately entitled and also to the benefit of the second ACP, I do not find any specific reply of the respondents in this context. 6. Considering the above facts and circumstances, I dispose of this writ application with an observation that if the petitioner files a fresh representation before the concerned authorities of the respondents, stating his claim and furnishing all relevant grounds in support thereof, the concerned authorities of the respondents shall, within two months from the date of receipt of such representation, consider the petitioner's claim, take an appropriate decision in accordance with law and effectively communicate such decision to the petitioner. If the petitioner is found entitled to his claim for payment, then the respondent authorities shall assess the amount and pay the same to him within one month from the date of decision. With these observation, this writ application is disposed of. Let a copy of this order be given to the learned counsel for the respondents.