VIKRAMSINH CHANDRASINH GOHIL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Mr.Anand L. Sharma, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice of RULE for the respondents. On the facts, and in the circumstances of the case, the petitions are being heard, and finally decided, today.

(2.) THIS group of petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India have been filed challenging different orders of recovery dated 18-6-2010 passed by respondent No.3 against all the petitioners, whereby recoveries have been directed to be made and certain recoveries have already been effected from the salaries of the petitioners, without affording them any opportunity of hearing.

(3.) MR.Shalin N.Mehta, learned advocate for the petitioners has submitted that the impugned orders of recovery dated 18-6-2010, have been passed without prior show cause notice or an opportunity of hearing being afforded to the petitioners, which is against the settled principles of law. The said orders having been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, cannot be permitted to stand and deserve to be quashed and set aside, on this ground alone. In support of the above submissions, reliance has been placed on a judgment of the Supreme Court in Bhagwan Shukla v. Union of India and others, (1994) 6 SCC 154.