IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA C.W.P.(T) No. 5575/2008 Date of decision: 2. 11. 2010 Sh. S.K. Malhotra …..Petitioner Versus H.P. State Electricity Board through its Secretary and another …..Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Onkar Jairath, Advocate. For the respondents: Ms. Anjula Khajuria, Advocate. Surinder Singh, J (Oral) Petitioner filed the Original Application in the Erstwhile Tribunal seeking following reliefs:- (i) To quash and set aside the impugned order dated 17.7.1995 at Annexure PA and re-fix the pay of the applicant in the manner indicated hereinbelow:- (a) Selection Grade as Assistant Engineer be allowed w.e.f. 11.2.1980; (b) Annual Increment as Selection Grade Assistant Engineer be granted w.e.f. 1.2.1981 and 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?. yes - 2 - (c) Further, re-fix the applicant as Assistant Executive Engineer w.e.f. 1.2.1981 after taking into consideration his annual increment as Assistant Engineer; (ii) To direct the respondents to refund to the applicant a sum of `18,496/- with compound interest @ 12% per annum on the amount, arbitrarily and illegally deducted from the salary of the applicant on the basis of void-abinitio and no-est impugned order at Annexure PA dated 17.7.1995 while allowing the attendant service benefits; 2. After the abolition of the Tribunal, this Original Application was transferred to this Court and registered as CWP(T). 3. Reply in the petition stands filed. 4. Heard and gone through the record. 5. Petitioner, at the time of filing the Original Application was working as Director Planning in the respondent-Board and officiated as Assistant Executive Engineer (AEE) vide order dated 30.12.1980 and fixed in a particular pay scale. Vide office order dated 17.7.1995 (Annexure PA) in continuation to the earlier office - 3 - order dated 22.10.1993 and in compliance of the order dated 5.12.1996 read with office order No. 100, of the Secretary of the respondent-Board, pay of the petitioner was re-fixed w.e.f. 22.1.1981 which necessitated the recovery of over payment to the tune of `13252/- pursuant to which the recovery was partly effected. 6. Now the petitioner stands retired and learned counsel foregoes the other reliefs, except that of arbitrary order of recovery being effected from him. In fact, the impugned order was passed without notice to the petitioner and, that too, after 15 years right from the date, he was promoted. The impugned order Annexure PA is against the principles of natural justice, therefore, it is quashed and set aside. The consequences shall follow. The matter stands disposed of. November 2, 2010 (Surinder Singh),J (cm)