HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - A No. - 6286 of 2025 Court No. - 7 HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties. 2. Present petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India has been filed challenging order dated 20.05.2025 whereby basic pay of petitioner has been re-fixed on ground that enhanced pay was earlier provided to petitioner incorrectly. 3. it has been submitted that impugned order has been passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to petitioner and only on the basis of alleged consent letter submitted by petitioner, a copy of which was never shown to petitioner. It is also submitted that impugned order reducing pay of petitioner has been passed after almost ten years of its sanction. 4. Learned State Counsel submits that impugned order has been passed in pursuance of direction issued by this Court dated 26.09.2022 in WRIT - A No. - 5238 of 2022 which provides for re- fixation of A.C.P. which has been incorrectly granted to an employee. It is further submitted that impugned order has been passed in pursuance of consent letter provided by petitioner for such recovery. 5. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusal of material on record, it appears that impugned order has been passed indicating incorrect pay-fixation granted to petitioner on 09.03.2006. Almost twenty years have Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Sushil Kumar Pathak Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Inspector (Civil Police) Avninder Kumar Pandey .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy,. Home Deptt., Lko. And Another .....Respondent(s) passed since grant of such benefit to petitioner. It is also evident that impugned order has been passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to petitioner. 6. Direction issued by this Court in in WRIT - A No. - 5238 of 2022 (Ram Gulam v. State of U.P. and others) has been perused by this Court and it is evident that directions have been issued to authorities to take effective measures for scrutinizing all previous orders whereby A.C.P. or any other allowance has been granted incorrectly and for effective measures for its rectification and recovery of same. 7. However, it is evident that directions have not given a carte blanche to authorities for effecting such orders and recoveries on an ex parte basis without affording any opportunity of hearing to person concerned particularly when such benefits have been granted for more than ten or twenty years. 8. Considering aforesaid facts and circumstances, it being evident that impugned order has been passed taking away a vested right granted to petitioner earlier and without affording any opportunity of hearing, the impugned order dated 20.05.2025 is hereby quashed by issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari granting liberty to opposite parties to pass fresh orders with regard to such a dispute but only after affording opportunity of hearing to petitioner and considering his reply. 9. Consequently, the petition succeeds and is allowed at the admission stage itself. Parties to bear their own costs. November 27, 2025 lakshman WRIA No. 6286 of 2025 2 (Manish Mathur,J.) Digitally signed by :- LAKSHMANA KUMAR TAMMANA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench