IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP(T) No.: 13981 of 2008. Decided on: 24.02.2011. _____________________________________________________ Tapinder Kapoor. … Petitioner. Versus Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board. … Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajay Mohan Goel, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms. Anjula Khajuria, Advocate. Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral). Petitioner’s pay was enhanced/increased in the year 1996. However, the same has been re-fixed as per contents of Annexure A-1, dated 7th August, 2006 and he has been called upon to deposit a sum of ` 84,901/-. The petitioner has not been heard before the issuance of Annexure A-1, dated 7th August, 2006. He has suffered civil and evil consequences. Salary is a property within the meaning of Article 300-A of the Constitution of India, which cannot be reduced, altered or varied save by authority of law. 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? - 2 - 2. Accordingly, in view of the observations made hereinabove, the petition is allowed. Annexure A-1, dated 7th August, 2006 is quashed and set aside. However, it shall be open to the respondent to proceed with the matter in accordance with law. The pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. February 24, 2011. (sck).