IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.7316 of 2008. Decided on: 22.12.2010. Inder Singh Kaundal. ……….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. Dharamvir Sharma,Advocate. For the respondents :Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. J.S. Guleria, Assistant Advocate General. Rajiv Sharma, J. (Oral) A sum of Rs. 6,000/- has been recovered from the salary of the petitioner. Admittedly, the petitioner has not been served with any notice before the decision to recover the amount was taken. Salary is a property within the meaning of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India. Petitioner has suffered civil and evil consequences. 2. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. Annexure PA dated November, 1999 is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to refund a sum of Rs. 6,000/- to the petitioner, within a period of two months after the production of certified copy of this judgment by the petitioner. In normal circumstances, the respondents ought to have been granted opportunity to proceed with the matter in accordance with law, however, since the petitioner has retired, he will suffer immense economic hardships. As such, the proceedings are closed. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge December 22, 2010. (krt) 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?. No.