CW 424/08 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.424/08 Rajesh Garg Versus State & Ors. DATE OF ORDER : 01/07/2008 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI Mr. Mahesh Gupta, for petitioner Mr. J.K. Agrawal, Addl. Govt. Counsel *** Matter has come up on application under Article 226(3) of the Constitution for vacation of ex-parte stay order passed by this court dated 18th January, 2008, but with the consent of parties, the matter is finally decided at this stage. Counsel submits that petitioner was appointed as Assistant Project Officer [Self Employment] on deputation vide order Ann.1 dated 25th February, 2004, but without affording opportunity, the government took decision to make recovery from him which is evident from Ann.5 dated 12th December, 2007. Respondents have filed reply to the writ petition wherein it has been averred that no orders have so far been issued. If the government will finally take decision to make recovery from him that will certainly be carried out after due compliance of principles of natural justice. From perusal of record and particularly the order impugned Ann.5 dated 12th December, 2007, the state government has informed the Chief Executive Officer of various Zila Parishad about CW 424/08 [2] the decision taken on account of revision of pay scale which became applicable from 1st November, 2002 and only observed that recovery if there is any, matter be processed accordingly. The order impugned does not disclose that the respondents have at all taken any decision to make recovery from petitioner so far. Even otherwise, if any prejudicial order is to be passed by the respondents including making recovery from petitioner, certainly the same cannot be made as already requested by counsel for respondents without due compliance of principles of natural justice which is otherwise a minimum requirement under the administrative law and it is always expected from the state government to afford an opportunity of hearing before any prejudicial order is passed against incumbent concerned. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with the direction that if the state government take decision to make recovery in reference to order dt.12/12/07, the same may be carried out only after due compliance of principles of natural justice and after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. No order as to costs. [AJAY RASTOGI], J. FRBOHRA424CW2008 1-7.doc