IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP (T) No. 11077 of 2008. Decided on 1.4.2011 Himani Narang ……….Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & others. ...….Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the petitioner: Mr. Vinod Thakur, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anshul Bansal, Additional Advocate General with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. Rajiv Sharma, J. (Oral) Petitioner was appointed vide Annexure A-II, dated 10th January, 2003, on a consolidated salary of Rs. 15,000/- per month. However, vide letter dated 24th, July, 2004 (Annexure A-I), though the contract of the petitioner has been renewed, but her salary has been reduced from Rs. 15,000/- to Rs. 12,000/- per month. Petitioner has not been heard before issuance of Annexurse A-I, dated 24th July, 2004. Petitioner has suffered civil and evil consequences, since her salary has been reduced without hearing her. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. Annexure A-I dated 24th July, 2004 is quashed and set aside. However, the liberty is 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?. No reserved to the respondent to proceed with the matter in accordance with law. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge April 1, 2011 (hl)