IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.8862 of 2008 Decided on : 8.12.2010 ___________________________________________________________ Smt. Sujata Rani … Petitioner. Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others … Respondents. ___________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the petitioner : Mr. Dilip Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Anil Jaswal, Dy. Advocate General. __________________________________________________________ V.K. Sharma, Judge.(Oral) The petition is filed on the following prayers:- “7.1) That the impugned order dated 17.8.2002 at Annexure A-4 and any other order which may be issued pursuant to this order, may kindly be quashed and set aside. 7.2) That the respondent department may be restrained from effecting any recoveries from the salary of applicant on account of alleged over payment of arrears of pay to her from 1.4.1994 to 10.8.1998.” 2. In the reply filed on behalf of the respondents, the following stand has been taken in para 3:- “3. That the present original application field by the applicant is not at all maintainable because the annexure A-4 has rightly been issued by the reply respondents to the 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. 2 respondent No.3 i.e the Principal Government Senior Secondary School Garsa because the applicant was not at all entitled for the arrears w.e.f 1.4.1994 to 10.8.1998 i.e prior to the joining of her duty Lecturer school cadre in Govt. Sr. Sec. School Garsa district Kullu on regular basis as prior to the joining of duty as lecturer in Govt. Sr. Sec.School Garsa Distt. Kullu,the applicant was working as lecturer on adhoc basis in Govt. College Kullu. Therefore, the pay of the applicant in view of the Govt. instructions has to be fixed on notional basis w.e.f 1.4.1994 to the date of joining her duty as school lecturer on regular basis. Therefore, the excess amount as paid to the applicant has to be recovered from her.” 3. Rejoinder refuting the stand taken by the respondents and reiterating the averments set up in the petition was filed. 4. Thus, it is manifest that prior to the regularization of the petitioner as Lecturer in school cadre, she was admittedly working as lecturer on adhoc basis in Govt. College Kullu and as such that even on the basis of principle of ‘equal pay for equal work’ she would have been entitled for more emoluments as were paid to her for the relevant period, which are now sought to be recovered from her. 5. It is seen from the records that while passing order Annexure A-4, principles of natural justice were infringed as admittedly no notice was issued to the petitioner before passing the said order. 6. In view of the above, order dated 17.8.2002, Annexure A-4 is quashed with liberty reserved to the respondents to consider the matter afresh and pass appropriate orders in the light of this judgment, in accordance with law and justice. 3 7. The writ petition, so also the pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of in the above terms. (V.K. Sharma) Judge. 8th December, 2010. (lsp)