As per case facts, multiple Writ Petitions challenged recovery orders initiated by the Petitioner(s) for alleged "dual benefits" drawn by the Respondent(s) under SRO-14 and SRO-59, leading to financial loss. ... The Central Administrative Tribunal had previously quashed these recovery orders, directing restoration of pay/pension. The Petitioner(s) appealed, arguing SRO-14 superseded SRO-59 and benefits were mutually exclusive. The question arose whether the 24-month bar under Government Instruction No. 1 to Article 242 of CSRs prevents re-opening emolument records for pension fixation in cases of erroneous "dual benefits", and if so, whether recovery of such benefits is permissible. Finally, the Court held that while the Respondent(s) erroneously received dual benefits and the Petitioner(s) are at liberty to re-fix pay/pension by excluding wrongly granted benefits, recovery of excess amounts from Group 'C' and 'D' employees, both retired and in service, is impermissible based on equity and to avoid undue hardship, modifying the Tribunal's Order accordingly.