IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No. 9896 of 2008. Decided on 14th December, 2010. _____________________________________________________ R. P. Chaudhary. ….Petitioner. -Versus- State of Himachal Pradesh and Others. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mrs. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate. For the respondents. : Mr. P.M. Negi, Deputy Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): Petitioner has retired from the respondent- department on 31.07.2001. However, after retirement of the petitioner, Annexure A-7, dated 03.07.2002 has been issued by the respondents, whereby recovery to the tune of `23848/- was ordered to be made from the salary of the petitioner. Admittedly, the petitioner has not been issued any show-cause notice before the decision was taken to effect the recoveries from his salary. He has suffered civil and evil consequences. Moreover, the petitioner has already retired. The decision ought to have been taken by the respondents before the retirement of the petitioner after hearing him. 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. No. - 2 - 2. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Annexure A-7, 03.07.2002 is quashed and set aside. In normal circumstances, this Court ought to have permitted the respondents to proceed with the matter in accordance with law, however, since the petitioner has already retired on 31.07.2001, the proceedings are closed. The respondents are directed to refund a sum of `23848/- to the petitioner, within a period of two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment by the petitioner. No costs. ] (Rajiv Sharma) Judge December 14, 2010. (bhupender) - 3 - `