CWP(T) No. 16277/2008 26.05.2010 Present: Mr. G. R. Palsra, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. R. K. Sharma, Sr. Addl. A.G. with Mr. P.M. Negi, Dy. A.G. for the respondents. Petitioner is aggrieved of the orders dated 5.8.2006 (Annexure A-5), 23.8.2006 (Annexure A-6) & 4.9.2006 (Annexure A-7), whereby his pay stands reduced. Undoubtedly petitioner was not issued any notice or afforded any opportunity of hearing before the impugned action was taken by the State. On this short ground alone the orders dated 5.8.2006 (Annexure A-5), 23.8.2006 (Annexure A-6) & 4.9.2006 (Annexure A-7), are quashed. The respondents are directed to issue notice to the petitioner and also afford him an opportunity of hearing before passing any order effecting his emoluments. Petitioner is due to retire in October, 2010. Hence the respondents are directed to take a decision positively before 31.7.2010. 2. Mr. G. R. Palsra, learned counsel for the petitioner has invited my attention to the decisions rendered by the Apex Court and this Court in Shyam Babu Verma & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors. (1994) 2 SCC 521, Shri Mohan Singh vs. State of H.P. & Ors. Latest HLJ 2007 (2) HP, 842, All India Postmen Ivth Class Employees & EDDA Assn. vs. Union of India & Ors. Latest HLJ 2007 (2) HP 921, Naresh Kumar vs. Union of India & Ors. Latest HLJ 2008(1) HP 78, Shri Sher Singh vs. State of H.P. & Ors. Latest HLJ 2006 (2) HP 1148 & Mahavir Singh vs. Union of India & Ors. Shim. L. C. 1997(2) 385. The respondents-authority shall take the same into account while passing the order. Needless to add, the order shall contain reasons and shall be communicated to the petitioner. Liberty granted to approach the Court if need so arises subsequently. 3. With these observations, the petition stands disposed of. ( Sanjay Karol ), Judge. May 26, 2010 (rana)