Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:5629 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2920 of 2023 Petitioner :- Rajendra Krishna And Another Respondent :- U.P. Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd. Thru. Chairman And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mayankar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Puneet Chandra,Abhishekh Srivastava,Nirmit Srivastava,Vibhanshu Srivastava And Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3192 of 2023 Petitioner :- Lal Bahadur Singh And Others Respondent :- U.P. Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Limited Lko. Thru. Its Chairman And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mayankar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Puneet Chandra,Abhishek Srivastava,Nirmit Srivastava,Vibhanshu Srivastava And Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3798 of 2023 Petitioner :- Om Prakash Bharti And Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy., Energy Deptt., Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashwani Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Nirmit Srivastava,Puneet Chandra,Vibhanshu Srivastava And Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8600 of 2024 Petitioner :- Rakesh Kumar Singh And Others Respondent :- U.P. Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd. Lko Thru. Chairman And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mayankar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Puneet Chandra,Vibhanshu Srivastava Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Shri Vibhanshu Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for all the respondents. 2. Learned counsels for the parties contend that the issue involved in WRIT - A No. - 2920 of 2023, WRIT - A No. - 3192 of 2023, WRIT - A No. - 3798 of 2023 and WRIT - A No. - 8600 of 2024 are the same. As such, the Court proceeds to hear all the petitions together and the same are being decided by way of a common judgement. For convenience, facts of WRIT - A No. - 2920 of 2023 are being taken. 3. Under challenge is the order dated 10.04.2023, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the petition, whereby the benefits of 2nd and 3rd ACP (Assured Carrier Progression Scheme), as had been granted to the petitioners vide orders dated 05.06.2015 and 01.01.2020, have been cancelled. 4. Further prayer is for a mandamus commanding the respondents to implement the office memo dated 01.01.2020 and provide the benefit of 3rd ACP to the petitioners in the shape of Grade Pay of Rs.8700/- along with arrears and not to make any recovery from the petitioners. 5. Bereft of unnecessary details, the facts are that the petitioners while working on the post of Assistant Engineer have been granted the benefit of the 2nd ACP by the order dated 05.06.2015, a copy of which is annexure 5 to the petition. By means of the said order, the Grade Pay of Rs.6600/- has been granted to the petitioners. The name of the petitioners finds place at serial Nos. 32 & 74. 6. Subsequent thereto, vide order dated 01.01.2020, a copy of which is annexure 8 to the petition, both the petitioners have been granted the benefit of 3rd ACP and granted the Grade Pay of Rs.8700/- with effect from the date of completion of five years of service from grant of 2nd ACP. The name of the petitioners finds place at serial No. 20 & 21. 7. The contention is that by means of the order impugned dated 10.04.2023, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the petition, the benefits of the 2nd & 3rd ACP, that had been granted to the petitioners, has been withdrawn. 8. The argument is that as a valuable right stood vested in the petitioners on account of 2nd and 3rd ACP having been granted to them vide the aforesaid orders, consequently, in case the respondents were of the view that the said benefits have been granted erroneously then any order could only have been passed after affording an opportunity of hearing to them and as no opportunity of hearing had been accorded to the petitioners prior to the passing of the aforesaid order, as such, the order impugned is in gross violation of rules of natural justice and consequently merits to be quashed on this ground alone. 9. Shri Vibhanshu Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has tried to justify the order impugned dated 10.04.2023 but fairly states, on the basis of averments contained in the counter affidavit, that no opportunity of hearing had been granted to the petitioners prior to passing of the order impugned. 10. Considering the aforesaid, it is thus apparent that prior to passing of the order impugned, no opportunity of hearing has been accorded to the petitioners whereby vitiating the order impugned and making the order in gross violation of rules of natural justice. 11. Keeping in view of the aforesaid discussion, the writ petition is allowed. The order impugned dated 10.04.2020, a copy of which is annexure 1 to the petition, is quashed. 12. Consequences to follow. 13. However, it would be open for the respondents to pass a fresh order after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. Order Date :- 27.1.2025 S. Shivhare Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench