FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2107 OF 2011 with WRIT PETITION NO. 1993 OF 2011 with WRIT PETITION NO. 2036 OF 2011 with WRIT PETITION NO. 2140 OF 2011 with WRIT PETITION NO. 2145 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 1 Mrs. A.V. Gondhalekar, AGP for petitioners. Mr. S.K. Naikwade, Advocate for respondent Nos. 2 and 3. CORAM :- B.R. GAVAI & M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATE :- 3RD OCTOBER, 2011. PER COURT :- 1] Heard Smt. Gondhalekar, learned AGP for petitioner and Shri Naikwade, learned counsel for the respondents. 2] The view taken by the learned Tribunal is in consonance with the settled principle as laid down by the Honourable Apex Court, in the case of "Bhagwan Shukla Vs. Union of India" reported in AIR 1994 SC 2480, wherein, the apex court has held that while altering the service conditions of the employees, an opportunity of hearing has to be given and as such, the same was in violation of principles of natural justice. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2107 OF 2011 with WRIT PETITION NO. 1993 OF 2011 with WRIT PETITION NO. 2036 OF 2011 with WRIT PETITION NO. 2140 OF 2011 with WRIT PETITION NO. 2145 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 2 3] In the present cases also, pay scale of the petitioners was sought to be reverted/reduced without following the principles of natural justice. As such, no case is made out for interference in the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the writ petitions are dismissed. [M.T. JOSHI,J.] [B.R. GAVAI, J.] grt/-