VIDYA PRAKASH GARG Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A conscious decision was taken by the respondents to grant the benefit of advance increments to the petitioners on 30.4.1990. The same was withdrawn on 25.2.1994.

(2.) The Respondent -State has again taken a conscious decision to restore the advance increments granted to the petitioners and similar situate persons on 27.8.1999. The same was subsequently withdrawn on 19.10.2001 vide Annexure A -6. Mr. Dilip Sharma, Advocate submits that the petitioners have not been granted reasonable opportunity of being heard before issuance of order dated 19.10.2001. He further submits that his clients have suffered civil and evil consequences as all of them are now at the verge of retirement. Mr. Rajender Dogra, learned Addl. Advocate General has justified the issuance of order dated 19.10.2001.

(3.) THE decision to give benefit of advance increments to the petitioners has been taken way back on 30.4.2009, but the same was withdrawn on 25.2.1994. The respondent -State has again taken the decision to restore the advance increments granted to the petitioners on 27.8.1999. It is not in dispute that the petitioners were not heard before issuance of office order dated 19.10.2001. The petitioners have suffered civil and evil consequences since their pay was reduced after issuance of officer order dated 19.10.2001. The petitioners have neither misled nor misrepresented the authorities at the time when the decision to grant the benefit of advance increments to the petitioners was taken earlier on 30.4.1990 and thereafter on 27.8.1999 when the advance increments were restored.