^ In the Hon'ble Hiah Court of Chhattishgarh at BilasDur C.G. Petitioner W.P.(S)No. 3 ^-'30 2010 Devshanker Panda aged 49 years Son of Vishveshwar Prasad Panda, Sthal Sahaya(c,, Setu Nirman Up Sambhag, JAGDALPUR C.G. Versus Respondents. 1 •*. ^ •* l^.f-'^^-'' ..••"A.1^' -. ^.^' 2. 3. State Government of Chhattishgarh, Through the Secretary, Public Works Department Mantralaya, D.K.S.Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) Engineer in Chief, PublicWorks Department, RaipurC.G. Chief Engineer, PublicWorks Deptt., National Highway & Bridge Construction Region, RaipurC.G. Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, National Highway Division, JagdalpurC.G. Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of writ of Mandamus. direction or other aDDropriate writ. 4" ^^ lltl ! HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 3230 of 2010 PETITIONER : Devshanker Panda. RESPONDENTS VERSUS State ofChhattisgarh & Others. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'ble Shn Satish K. AanihotrL J. Present: Shri Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri P.K.Bhaduri, Panel Lawyer forthe State/respondents. ORDER(ORAL) (Passed on 25th day of February, 2011) By this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 26.04.2007 (Annexure P/l) passed by the respondent 3, whereby the regular pay scale granted to the petitioner has been withdrawn without affording an opportunity ofhearing. Shri Shrivastava, leamed counsel appeadng for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in this case is squarely covered by a decision of this Court in Devesh Chandra Verma v. State of Chhattisgarh, as in the instant case, no opportunity of hearing or show cause notice was given to the petitioner before passing the impugned order. Leamed counsel appearing for the State/respondents submits that in view of the circular dated 15.12.1992 of the General Administration DepaUment ofthen State ofMadhya Pradesh, steps to correct the grant of regular pay scale has been taken by the impugned order. However, he fairly submits that no opportunity of W.P.(S) 6185/2007, decidedon 14.03.2008 ^'^ hearing to the petitioner before passing ofthe impugned order, was afforded. Needless to mention that for about 18 years, no steps was taken and after 18 years, the respondents, without giving an opportunity of hearing, are trying to withdraw the regular pay scale granted to the petitioner, on the basis of the old circular. From any angle, this cannot be appreciated or accepted. In a case where a right has accrued for a long time of 18 years in favour ofthe petitioner, the same cannot be set aside by a mere executive instruction. Accordingly, in view of the aforesaid and in light of the order 4ated 14.03.2008 (Annexure P/3) passed 'mDev Chandra Verma , the order dated 27.04.2007 (Annexure P/l) is quashed. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge imit