CWP(T) No. 2114 of 2008. 03.03.2009 Present: Mr. Dilip Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.K. Sharma, Senior Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Additional Advocate General and Mr. Vikas Rathore, Deputy Advocate General for the respondents. The pay of the petitioner was fixed vide office order dated 25th July, 1991. This has been done in compliance to the orders of the Financial Commissioner-cum-Secretary (PW), dated 7th November, 1972 and Technical Staff Pay fixation order dated 17th July, 1989 alongwith other notifications issued on 26th July, 1989, 25th November, 1989 and latest clarification dated 11th February, 1991. The copy of the notification dated 11th February, 1991 is annexed as Annexure A-7. However, vide office order dated 5th January, 1993 office order dated 25th July, 1991 stands superseded. Mr. Dilip Sharma has strenuously argued that once a conscious decision has been taken in conformity with office memorandum dated 11th February, 1991 vide office order dated 25th July, 1991, the pay of the petitioner could not be re-fixed. His further contention is that before issuing office order dated 5th January, 1993 the petitioner ought to have been heard. It is settled law that any order which has civil consequences, must be passed in conformity with the principles of natural justice. It is in fact admitted by the respondents/State that no notice ever was issued to the petitioner before passing of office order dated 5th January, 1993. The order dated 5th January, 1993 has visited the petitioner with civil consequences since his pay has been reduced. This could not be done without hearing the petitioner. Accordingly the writ petition is allowed. Office order dated 5th January, 1993 (Annexure A-12) is quashed and set aside. Liberty is, however, reserved to the respondents to pass appropriate orders after hearing the petitioner. It is made clear that at the time of passing fresh orders, the respondents shall also take into consideration the notification dated 11th February, 1991. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. (Rajiv Sharma), J. March 03, 2009. (sck)