HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD WRIT - A No. - 15492 of 2025 Court No. - 34 HON'BLE VIKAS BUDHWAR, J. 1. Heard Sri B.D. Pandey, learned counsel for the writ petitioner and Sri R.S. Umrao, learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. The case of the writ petitioner is that he was appointed as Ayurvedic Pharmacist on 20.06.1991, he was accorded annual increment with effect from 01.01.2005 and the salary came to be revised by virtue of the order dated 26.09.2012. Post completion of 26 years of service, an order came to be passed on 02.08.2022 and thereafter, certain orders came to be passed on 15.5.2023, however, without putting to notice the writ petitioner unilaterally on 22.05.2024, an order came to be passed by Regional Ayurvedic &Unani Officer, District Siddharthnagar making recovery of an amount of Rs. 40,533/- per month 3. Questioning the said order, the present writ petition has been preferred. 4. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner while inviting attention towards para 13 of the writ petition has submitted that the said order is in violation of principles of natural justice as no unilateral action can be taken. 5. Sri R.S. Umrao, learned Standing Counsel submits that it is always open for the employer to rectify the mistake, if any, however, there is a condition precedent that before undertaking an exercise opportunity of hearing is to be accorded while putting the other person to notice. 6. I have heard the submission so made across the bar and perused the record. Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Bhagwan Dutt Pandey Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Birendra Nath Tripathi .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) 7. Apparently, certain benefits stood acceded to the writ petitioner which have been sough to be altered while passing an order. The allegation of the writ petitioner is that the same is in violation of the principles of natural justice. In Bhagwan Shukla Vs. Union of India and others reported in (1994) 6 SCC 154 wherein the following was observed.- "3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. That the petitioner's basic pay had been fixed since 1970 at Rs. 190 p.m. is not disputed. There is also no dispute that the basic pay of the appellant was reduced to Rs. 181 p.m. from Rs. 190 pan. in 1991 retrospectively w.e.f. 18.12.1970. The appellant has obviously been visited with civil consequences but he had been granted no opportunity to show cause against the reduction of his basic pay. He was not, even put on notice before his pay was reduced by the department and the order came to be made behind his back without following any procedure known to law. There, has, thus, been a flagrant violation of the principles of natural justice and the appellant has been made to suffer huge financial loss without being heard. Fair play in action warrants that no such order which has the effect of an employee suffering civil consequences should be passed without putting the concerned to notice and giving him a hearing in the matter. Since, that was not done, the order (memorandum) dated 25.7.1991. which was impugned before the Tribunal could not certainly be sustained and the Central Administrative Tribunal fell in error in dismissing the petition of the appellant. The order of the Tribunal deserves to be set aside. We, accordingly, accept this appeal and set aside the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 17.9.1993 as well as the order (memorandum) impugned before the Tribunal dated 25.7.1991 reducing the basic pay of the appellant From Rs. 190 to Rs. 181 w.e.f. 18.12.1970." 8. Since the writ petitioner has not been put to notice and the entire action has been taken unilaterally, thus, the order cannot be sustained. 9. Looking into the overall fact situation and the stand taken by the respective parties, this Court without delving any further is disposing of the writ petition in the following terms.- (a) the order dated 22.05.2024 and 13.05.2024 passed by Regional Ayurvedic & Unani Officer, District Siddharth Nagar is set aside; (b) writ petitioner shall prefer a comprehensive representation along with the self attested copy of the present petition and certified copy of the order passed today by 31.10.2025; (c) on the said motion, the fourth respondent, Regional Ayurvedic & Unani Officer, District Siddharth Nagar shall fix a date for putting to notice the writ petitioner and hear him after due communication; (d) thereafter orders be passed within a period of two WRIA No. 15492 of 2025 2 months. 10. With the above observation, the present petition stands disposed of. October 15, 2025 Rajesh WRIA No. 15492 of 2025 3 (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad