AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
G.S. Singhvi, J.—This is a petition for quashing of the orders dated 14.7.1999 (Annexure P.11) and 22.12.1999 (Annexure P.13) vide which recovery from the pay of the petitioners is proposed to be made of the alleged excess amount paid to them by the authorities of the Karnal Aviation Club (for short ''the Club''). The petitioners have also prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus to restore the pay scale in which they were drawing salary till the issuance of the letter Annexure P.11.
One of the grounds on which the petitioners have challenged the proposed recovery from their salaries is that they were not given notice or opportunity of hearing before the decision to revise their pay and 10 recover the alleged excess amount from their pay was taken.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, we are convinced that the writ petition deserves to tie allowed on the short ground that the impugned orders are vitiated due to violation of the rule of audi alteram partem. It cannot be disputed that on the basis of pay fixation ordered by the competent authority of the Club, the petitioners have been drawing salaries for the last more than ten years. In other words, they have acquired civil rights pursuant to the pay fixation ordered by the competent authority of the Club. Therefore, before the passing any order adversely affecting their right to receive pay etc. it was incumbent upon the respondents to give notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, which they have admittedly not done. Therefore, keeping in view the law laid down by the Supreme Court in State of Orissa Vs. Dr. (Miss) Binapani Dei and Others, , Sayeedur Rehman Vs. The State of Bihar and Others, , A.K. Kraipak and Others Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Others, , S.L. Kapoor v. Jagmohan, AIR 1981 SC 136, Mrs. Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Another, and Olga Tellis and Others Vs. Bombay Municipal Corporation and Others, we allow the writ petition and quash the impugned orders/communications with liberty to the respondents to puss fresh order after giving action-oriented notice and opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.
Petition allowed.