IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP (T) No. 8349 of 2008 Decided on : 05.04.2011 Lalita Kumari …Petitioner. Versus State of H.P. & Ors. …Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting ?1 No For the Petitioner : Mr. K.B.Khajuria, Advocate. For the Respondents : Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Additional Advocate General, for respondents No.1 and 2. Kuldip Singh, Judge (Oral) The petitioner has prayed a direction to the respondents to refund the amount which has already been deducted from the salary of the petitioner after reducing her salary without any notice. 2. The relevant facts are that the petitioner was appointed as Lecturer (History) on contract basis. She was given the pay scale of ` 1800-3200 alongwith other usual allowances. The initial contract period was upto 31.12.1999. The petitioner joined on 15.2.1999 and served upto 31.12.1999. Thereafter, the petitioner came to know that her services are not likely to be extended by the respondent-Department, therefore, she filed O.A. No. 414 of 2000. As per Annexure A-2 letter dated 30.3.2002 the Tribunal had directed the respondents in OA No. 414 of 2000 to re-engage the petitioner if the post was vacant or till a regular hand on fresh appointment through the Public Service Commission, was appointed. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment ?Yes 2 3. The petitioner was being paid salary to the tune of ` 7,555/- per month but without any notice to the petitioner her salary was reduced to ` 6,584/- per month. This action of the respondents has been challenged by the petitioner in the present petition. 4. It has been stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has now been regularised. The Tribunal vide order dated 30.4.2002 had ordered that till next date, no recovery be effected. The learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that thereafter the respondents have not deducted any amount from the salary of the petitioner. 5. In substance, only an amount of ` 1,000/- which was deducted by the respondents from the salary of the petitioner is involved in the present petition. The respondents have not filed any reply to the petition. The respondents made deduction from the salary of the petitioner amounting to ` 1,000/- without any notice to the petitioner nor it has been explained on what ground ` 1,000/- was deducted from the salary of the petitioner. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to refund an amount of ` 1,000/- to the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of supply of copy of this judgment by the petitioner to the competent authority, failing which the respondents shall also pay interest at the rate of 9% on the said amount. The petition stands disposed of. ( Kuldip Singh ), April 5, 2011. Judge. (GR)