IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No. 15202/2026 Decided on: 25.09.2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Man Singh & Anr. …..Petitioners Versus State of H.P. and Ors. .....Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Ajay Kumar Chauhan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Rajat Choudhary, Assistant Advocate General. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Petitioners’ grievance was noticed in the following order passed in this petition on 14.09.2026: - “Notice. Mr. L.N. Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Petitioners’ grievance is that, under office order dated 11.08.2025 [Annexure P-2 (colly.)], they were drawing pay of Rs. 32,400/- as on 01.01.2026, whereas, under the impugned office order dated 21.01.2026 [Annexure P-3 (colly.)], they have been placed at Rs. 24,900/-. Such reduction in pay has been carried out without issuing any notice to the petitioners and is not in consonance with the settled legal position. Let learned Deputy Advocate General to have instructions in the matter. List after one week, as prayed for.” 1Whether reporters of print and electronic media may be allowed to see the order? Yes. 2 Pursuant to above, learned Assistant Advocate General has placed on record office instructions dated 17.09.2026, relevant portion of which is as under: - “In compliance to the directions given by the Hon'ble Court, it is respectfully submitted that the petitioners are entitled for work charge status but on notional basis after the finality of Surajmani's Case (SLP(C) No.23016/2023) on 06.02.2025. The aforesaid judgment also held that - We also make it explicitly clear that the State in its endeavour of implementing the orders of the Tribunal, High Court or this Court, if having paid the amount in excess. would be at liberity to take such steps as it deems fit without insisting for one time recovery. Therefore, the work charge status allowed on notional basis vide office order dated 01.08.2025. The copy of office orders are annexed as Annexure-I(colly). In consonance to the office order dated 01.08.2025, the pay of the petitioners was re-fixed earlier vide office order dated 11.08.2025(Annexure P-2 of the petition) by allowing financial benefit on actual basis erroneously which was rightly rectified and extended on notional basis vide office order dated 21.01.2026 (Annexure P-3 of the petition) in compliance to the judgment rendered in Surajmani's case on 06.02.2025.” 2. In view of the grievance of the petitioners, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, documents appended with the writ petition, instructions placed on record for the respondents and the nature of order being passed hereinafter, there is no necessity to call for the reply for the respondents. The matter has accordingly been heard. 3. Admittedly, before reducing the pay of the petitioners, notices were not issued to them by the respondents. In terms of 3 the impugned office orders at Annexure P-3 (colly), the pay of the petitioners has been reduced from Rs. 32,400/-, which they were drawing as on 01.12.2026 to Rs. 24,900/-. The impugned action entails civil consequences and, therefore, could not have been taken without complying with the principles of natural justice. The respondents, however, have reduced the pay of the petitioners without even affording them any opportunity of hearing. For the aforesaid reasons, the impugned orders at Annexure P-3 (colly), qua the petitioners, are quashed and set aside. The respondents shall, however, be at liberty to proceed in the matter afresh, in accordance with law, after complying with the principles of natural justice and by affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The writ petition to stand disposed of in above terms. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. Jyotsna Rewal Dua Judge 25th September, 2026 rohit