[2025:RJ-JP:12952] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 454/2008 Sunita Sharma D/o Shri Shyamsundar Sharma, Plot No.2 Ashok Vihar,near Petrol Pump Alwar ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan Through Commissioner Secondary Education, Rajasthan Bikaner 2. The District Education Officer Secondary, Alwar 3. The Principal, Government Balika Senior Secondary School, Smd Alwar ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Ajay Raj Tantia For Respondent(s) : Ms.Anjum Parveen for Ms.Namita Parihar, Dy.GC. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 20/03/2025 1. By way of filing this writ petition, a challenge has been made against the impugned order dated 13.12.2007 passed by the respondents by which the benefit of selection scale, extended to the petitioner vide order dated 12.12.2007 has been withdrawn and, accordingly, recovery orders have been passed against the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pay fixation of the petitioner was done rightly and accordingly, the benefits of pay scale were extended to the petitioner under the existing pay scale of Rs.6500-10500, but then, all of a sudden, the order impugned was passed by which his pay scale was revised and the [2025:RJ-JP:12952] (2 of 3) [CW-454/2008] same has been fixed as Rs.5500-9000 and further an order has been passed to recover the excess amount paid to the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel submits that the aforesaid order has been passed by the respondents, without issuing any notice and without providing any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Counsel submits that such action on the part of the respondents has resulted into violation of principles of natural justice, hence, interference of this Court is warranted. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-State opposes the arguments raised by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that, due to an inadvertent mistake, wrong pay fixation was granted to the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that subsequently, the mistake was rectified by the respondent- authorities by passing the order impugned. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner is entitled to get the selection scale of Rs.5500-9000, and the same was erroneously fixed as Rs.6500- 10500 and therefore, a decision was taken to recover the excess amount paid to the petitioner. Hence, under these circumstances, interference of this Court is not warranted. 4. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record. 5. Perusal of the record indicates that pay scale of Rs.6500- 10500 was granted to the petitioner by the respondents, subsequently the same was changed to Rs.5500-9000 by the respondents by passing the impugned orders dated 12.12.2007 and 13.12.2007. It appears that the aforesaid orders have been passed by the respondents without issuing any notice and without affording him any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The [2025:RJ-JP:12952] (3 of 3) [CW-454/2008] aforesaid orders have been passed by the respondents, in utter violation of the principles of natural justice. 6. It is settled proposition of law that whenever any adverse order is passed against any person, the authorities concerned are supposed to provide an opportunity of hearing to the said person. But herein the instant case, the aforesaid exercise has not been done by the respondents and straightaway the orders impugned have been passed which are not sustainable in the eyes of law and are liable to be quashed and set-aside. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition stands allowed. The orders dated 12.12.2007 & 13.12.2007 stand quashed and set-aside. The matter is remitted to the concerned authorities for passing fresh orders, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 8. All applications (pending, if any) stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma/103