IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 10309 of 2008. Decided on: 27.12.2010. __________________________________________________________ Madan Kumar Barotra. … Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : Mr. M.C. Verma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General for respondents No.1 to 4. Mr. Lokender Thakur, Advocate for respondent No.5. Rajiv Sharma, J. (oral): Petitioner was granted higher pay-scale vide Annexure A- 10, dated 19th March, 1996. The same has been withdrawn on 29.11.1997 without hearing the petitioner. Since the salary of the petitioner has been reduced, he has suffered civil and evil consequences. The respondents have already recovered a sum of Rs.14979 from the petitioner, that too, without hearing him. 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. - 2 - 2. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Annexures A-1 and A- 2 are quashed and set aside. Respondents are directed to refund the amount recovered from the salary of the petitioner without hearing. In normal circumstances, respondents ought to have been given the opportunity to proceed with the matter in accordance with law. However, since the petitioner has already retired, the matter is ordered to be closed. The pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. December 27, 2010. (sck).