IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16365 of 2010 SHIV SHANKAR MISHRA . Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS . ----------- 2. 7.10.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner is aggrieved by the orders dated 30.4.2010 and 3.6.2010. The impugned orders reduced his pay scale with effect from 1.1.1971 to 1.1.1996 after his superannuation on 31.3.2010 and also directs recovery of alleged excess payment. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned orders are in violation of the principles of natural justice apart from being highly unjust and inequitable belated in nature after his superannuation when his resources are limited. This Court on the face of the impugned orders is satisfied that it does not contain any discussion of an opportunity given to the petitioner to show cause on grounds specified to enable him to understand the mind of the respondents as to why he was being visited with such adverse civil consequence after his superannuation. Counsel for the State submits that it 2 appears that the pay scale had been wrongly fixed by the authorities and that is sought to be rectified. An order in violation of the principles of natural justice is like a still born child which never comes into existence. If the respondents insist on arrogating unto themselves powers which the law does not vest them with, the Court has little option but to set aside such illegal orders. In AIR 1999 SUPREME COURT 3262 "Gajanan L. Parnekar v. State of Goa", the Supreme Court at paragraph 8 has held as follows :- “8. The manner in which the order dated 21st/22nd January, 1999 came to be made was, to say the least, not proper. The appellant was denuded of the benefits of the order dated 16-2- 1994 unheard. There has been a breach of the principle of natural justice and a violation of fair play in action. The earlier order made in favour of the appellant as early as on 16-2-1994 was rescinded without giving any opportunity to the appellant to show cause against it. Absorption of the appellant as Headmaster of Government High School by the order dated 16-2-1994 had not been put in issue through any proceedings by any party at any point of time. The benefit could not have been taken away from the appellant without affording him any opportunity of hearing, even where the absorption as Head Master of High School had been put in issue. The principles of natural justice have 3 been respected in their breach.” The impugned orders dated 30.4.2010 and 3.6.2010 are accordingly set aside without prejudice to the rights of the respondents. If no dues certificate after his superannuation has been withheld only on the ground of the aforesaid impugned orders, there shall be no justification in now withholding the same in light of the present order. Let the same be issued forthwith. The writ application stands disposed. P. Kumar ( Navin Sinha, J.)