1 2025:CGHC:20819 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2697 of 2025 1 Dr. M. K. Chaturvedi S/o Late Mahavir Prasad Chaturvedi Aged About 65 Years R/o Parmanand Nagar, Aamanaka Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Agriculture Development And Farmers Welfare And Biotechnology, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya Through Its Vice Chancellor, Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Krishak Nagar, Labhandi, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 Registrar Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Krishak Nagar, Labhandi, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 4 The Controller (Lekha Niyantrak) Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Krishak Nagar, Labhandi, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.05.08 11:37:35 +0530 2 For Petitioner(s) : Shri Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate For Respondent/ State : Shri Akhilesh Kumar, G.A. For Respondents No. 2 to 4 : Shri Shashank Thakur, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 06/05/2025 Heard. 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner, is questioning the order dated 30.09.2024 (Annexure P-1) passed by Controller, Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Krishak Nagar, Labhandi, Raipur, by which the anticipatory pension of the petitioner has been fixed on the reduced pay scale of Rs. 57,700/- whereas when the petitioner retired his last pay was Rs. 2,10,555/-. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that once the anticipatory pension has been fixed by the respondent/ Controller on the basis of reduced pay scale, its presumed that the pay has already been reduced and before taking such decision on the pay scale no opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioner, hence the order of Controller by which the anticipatory pension has been fixed on the basis of reduced pay scale is absolutely illegal and is gross violation of principles of natural justice. 3 3. Learned counsel for the respondents on affidavit submits that on some query made by the Agriculture Development Department from the University regarding the Assistant Professor/ Scientist who have not cleared the NEET examination within the stipulated period, however the benefit of annual increment has been extended to them. In reply to said query, after enquiry, a report has been prepared and a proposal was forwarded to the Department by communication dated 17.01.2025 (Annexure D-4) and the final decision is still awaited. He further submits that the pension fixed by the respondents vide Annexure P-1 is not a final pension and it is only anticipatory fixation of the pension, awaiting the decision of the State government, thus it is not the proper stage, where the petitioner can question the anticipatory pension. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings and the documents. 5. Perusal of the order of the Controller dated 30.09.2024, shows that the controller has fixed the anticipatory pension of the petitioner on the basis of reduced pay scale and further perusal of the pleadings and perusal of the impugned order, it also reflects that the anticipatory pension has been fixed at a pay scale of 57,700/- whereas the last pay drawn by the petitioner when he retired was Rs. 2,10,555/-. Thus, the university on the basis of the query made by the Department of Agriculture Development has sent a enquiry report to the State government, though it has been pending before the State government, but the Controller on its 4 own fixed the anticipatory pension on the reduced pay scale without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. As far as, the reduction of pay scale is concerned, there is no decision and if the respondents/ Controller has taken decision on its own and fixed the anticipatory pension of the basis of reduced pay scale the decision of the Controller manifestly not preceded by any show cause notice to the petitioner. Hence, the order passed by the petitioner is in gross violation of the principles of natural justice and the decision taken by any authority to reduced an employee pay scale cannot be made without following the principles of natural justice. 6. Hence, I am of the view that, the order passed by the Controller by which the anticipatory pension has been fixed on reduced pay scale dated 30.09.2024 (Annexure P-1) is quashed and the respondents/ University is directed to fix the anticipatory pension of the petitioner on the last pay drawn by the petitioner. However, liberty is reserved for the respondents/ University as well as the State to fix the pay scale of the petitioner in accordance with law and also the pension of the petitioner be finalized within a period of 100 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is allowed. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE Jyoti