IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP(T) No. 9296 of 2008 Decided on: 18.12.2010 Chintu Devi …Petitioner Versus H.P. Board of School Education and another …Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1. No For the petitioner : Mr. Jivesh Sharma, Advocate vice counsel. For the respondents : Mr. K. B. Khajuria, Advocate. Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral) : Petitioner is aggrieved by issuance of Annexure P-16, dated 4.7.2006, whereby a sum of ` 2,35,000/- has been withheld from the retiral/pensionary benefits of the petitioner. Admittedly, the petitioner has not been heard before the decision was taken by the respondent-Board to withhold a sum of ` 2,35,000/. He has suffered civil and evil consequences. Since, the petitioner had been working as Assistant Secretary on permanent basis, a regular inquiry ought to have been held before the decision was taken to withhold a sum of ` 2,35,000/. There is violation of principles of natural justice. 2. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed and Annexure P-16, dated 4.7.2006 is quashed and set aside. The respondent-Board is directed to release a sum of ` 2,35,000/-. to the petitioner with interest @ 6% per annum. However, the liberty is reserved to the 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No -2- respondent-Board to proceed with the matter in accordance with law, if it so chooses. No costs. Copy dasti on usual terms. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge December 18, 2010 (K. Attri)