~^ ^•(OQ^ THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGAR-H WRIT PETITION (SWO. 4-(cl&6 /2006 c^ Smt. Vidya Bai/ W/o- Shrivijay Kumar, .<"^,° Aged about ?3 years, o-"-^' / Presently workiag as Sweeper in Kamla Nehru Pre (^>T'^' / Mati'ic Hostal, Bilaspur, j'.^y'v 9<./^/^./ -^.-6U?'SC7 ?-"0\y Chhattisgarh. PETITIONER l^ .a^- R/o- New Sarkanda, Near Muktidham Chowk, Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, VERSUS 1. State ofChliattisgarh,, Through- Secretary, . Deptt.ofTribalWelfare D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Commissioner,/ Tribal Welfare (SC, ST & Tribal Development), Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3. Collector,, Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 4. Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare (SC, ST & Tribal Development), Bilaspur, Distnct Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 5. Disbrict Organizer Harijan & Scheduled Caste Development, Bilaspur, Chliattisgarh. RESPONDENTS sX' P^RIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPmATE WRiT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, CERTIORARI ETC. 5 HI(?H COURT OF CHHATTISeARH AT BF.-ASPUR W. P. fs) No. 4986 of 2006 Petitioner Versus The State of Chhati-Esgarh & others Singte Bsnch; Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sotish K. ^gnihotri. Shn" Pankaj Shrivastava,Advocate for Smt. Anju Ahuja, Dy. Govt. Advocate for the ORDER >th (12th September, 2006) 1. TTie petitioner was initiatly appointed on daily wages basis as Sweeper (Safai i&rmchari) by the District Organizer Hflirijan Development, Bilaspur by order dated 25.11.1986 (Annexure P/2) for a period of 89 days. 2. 5ervice of the petitioner was regu!arized as Sweeper by order dated 30.10.1993 (Annexure P/3) and the salary of the petitioner was fixed Rs. 883/- per month as per Collector rate, which was subsequently revised by the CoiSector from time to time and in the month of June, 2000 she was getting Rs. 1300/- per month. 3. Learned counse! fpr the petitioner submits that the 'ents issued the circular dated 10.7.2000 V, (Annexure P/l) and on the basis of that the salary'of the petitioner was reduced from Rs. 1800/- per month to 300/- per month. Subsequently, the safary of tiie petitioner was increosed from Rs. 300/- to 509/- w.e.f. 6.3.2004. 4. The petitioner has fited tiiis petition chailenging the impugned order dated 10.7.2000 (Annexure P/!}, whereby the salary of tiie petitioner was reduced from 1800/- to 300/- per month. . Advocate appearing Caste and ja, learnei •s submits tf Trs'be Welfare bepartment, 6ovt. of Madhya Pradesh by order dcted 10.7.2000 (Annexure P/l) has imposed a ban on al! appointments, ttierefore, it wcs decided to pay an amount of Rs. 300/- per month to the petitioner as montiiiy' wages. 6. After heorin9 leamed counsel for the parties and perusing the records, it is estabiished the petitioner was appointed way back in 1986 as dsi!y wages emptoyee. Thereafter the petitioner has been continuing as Sweeper. Accord'mg to learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner was regularized by order dated 30.10.1993 as Sweeper, the so called ban imposed by order dated 10.7.2000 is not applicab!e to the case of the petitioner as she has been workin9 since 25.11.1986. The decision of the respondents to pay an amount of Rs. 300/- per month is without any basis as the dai!y wagers ir ^. are paid on the basis of daily wages, fixed by the Coflector and monthty basis. 7. It is wet! setl-led principfe of law 1+iat reduction of salsry tantamounts to imposition of major penalty visitlng with civii consequences. No order imposing penalty, stigma or reduction in rank or salary ciai be passed against eui emptoyee without affording him proper opporluni-ty of hesring to put forwwrd his case. In tiie present case, the principle of natura! justice smd fair-pSoy in action has not been foiiowed before reducing the sabry of the petitioner from Rs. 1800/- to 300/-, may be for ever reasons. Thus, tiiis ord^r dated 10.7.2000 (Annexure P/l) is vitfated and dsserves to be amd ss quashed. The petitioner is entitied to aj! the benefits flowing from this Bablu For the aforementioned reasons, the writ petition is allowed dnd the respondents are directed to '•4'i in ffle jes to the 8.9.2002 (Annexure P/4), wsthin a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of thts order. Sd/- Satish KAgnihotri Judge