IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.8863 of 2008 Decided on : 8.12.2010 ___________________________________________________________ Lalit Mohan Sharma … Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others … Respondents. ___________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner : Mr. Dilip Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General. __________________________________________________________ V.K. Sharma, Judge.(Oral) The petition is filed on the following prayers:- “7.1) That the impugned order dated 5.9.2002 at Annexure A-4 as also order dated 13.9.2002 at Annexure A-5 may kindly be quashed and set aside. 7.2) That the respondent department may be restrained from effecting any recoveries from the salary of applicant on account of alleged over payment of arrears of pay to him from 1.4.1994 to 10.8.1998.” 2. In the reply filed on behalf of the respondents, the following stand has been taken in para 3:- “3. That the present original application field by the applicant is not at all maintainable because the annexure A-4 has rightly been issued by the reply respondents to the respondent No.3 i.e the Principal Government Senior 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. 2 Secondary School Bhunter because the applicant was not at all entitled for the arrears w.e.f 1.4.1994 to 30.8.1998 i.e prior to the joining of his duty Lecturer school cadre in Govt. Sr. Sec. School Bhunter district Kullu on regular basis, as prior to the joining of duty as lecturer in Govt. Sr. Sec.School Bhunter Distt. Kullu,the applicant was working as lecturer on tenure basis in Govt. College Sarkaghat. Therefore, as per the decision of the Government notification No. EDN-A-Chha(15)-4/94 dated 22.12.1997 the matter regarding grant of increments to the tenure teachers on their regularization of service was considered at Government level and the same has been rejected (copy of which is annexed and the same is marked as Annexure RA). Therefore, the excess amount as paid to the applicant has to be recovered from him.” 3. Rejoinder refuting the stand taken by the respondents and reiterating the averments set up in the petition was filed. 4. Thus, it is manifest that prior to the regularization of the petitioner as Lecturer in school cadre, he was admittedly working as lecturer on tenure basis in Govt. College Sarkaghat and as such even on the basis of principle of ‘equal pay for equal work’ the petitioner would have been entitled for more emoluments as were paid to him for the relevant period, which are now sought to be recovered from him. 5. It is seen from the records that while passing orders Annexures A-4 and A-5, principles of natural justice were infringed as admittedly no notice was issued to the petitioner before passing the said order. 3 6. In view of the above, orders dated 5.9.2002, Annexure A-4 and 13.9.2002, Annexure A-5 are quashed with liberty reserved to the respondents to consider the matter afresh and pass appropriate orders in the light of this judgment, in accordance with law and justice. 7. The writ petition, so also the pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of in the above terms. (V.K. Sharma) Judge. 8th December, 2010. (lsp)