IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No.: 3733 of 2010. Decided on: 23.07.2010. __________________________________________________________ Ramesh Chand. … Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. For the petitioner : Mr. Dilip Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. R.K. Bawa, Advocate General with Mr. Ankush Dass Sood, Additional Advocate General. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral): Annexure P-8, order passed by the first respondent is under challenge. According to the petitioner, by the impugned order, the benefit already accrued to him as per Annexure P-6, order passed by the Divisional Commissioner had been vacated without any opportunity for hearing to him in the matter. On 9th July, 2010 we had passed the following order:- “It is submitted that while passing Annexure P-8 order, whereby the benefit already accrued to the petitioner as per Annexure P-6, order of the Divisional Commissioner has been vacated by the Financial Commissioner, no opportunity of being heard was given to the petitioner. A short reply on this aspect - 2 - alone shall be filed within ten days from today by the 1st respondent.” It is not replied yet. 2. Going through the pleadings, it appears that no opportunity was given to the petitioner while passing the impugned order. Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and only on the ground of non-compliance of the principles of natural justice, the impugned order is quashed and set aside without prejudice to the first respondent to pass appropriate order in the matter after according opportunity for hearing to the petitioner. 3. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy dasti. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. (Justice Rajiv Sharma), Judge. July 23, 2010. (sck/awasthi).