LAXMAN CHOUDHARY Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been preferred mainly against an order passed by respondent No. 3 dated 27th May, 2006, which is at Annexure-9 to the memo of the present petition whereby, without giving any opportunity of being heard or without giving any notice to the petitioner, the pay scale of the petitioner has been reduced and that too with effect from 1st April, 1981 i.e. after approximately 25 years of service of the petitioner. It is also submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that looking to the impugned order, no reason has been assigned and therefore, the said order is a non-speaking order. Moreover, respondent No. 3 has relied upon some letters dated 19th January, 1995 as well as 8th February, 1995. Though these two documents are relied upon, never a copy whereof have been supplied to the petitioner. Nobody knows what are those letters. Had an opportunity would have been given, it would have been pointed out by the petitioner that the petitioner was rightly appointed as Typist in year, 1970 and correctly, adjusted towards the post of Stenographer on 10th December, 1980 vide order at Annexure-2 to the memo of the present petition and thereafter, the petitioner worked for approximately 25 years and abruptly, arbitrary and unilaterally, a decision has been taken in year, 2006 for reduction in the pay scale of the petitioner and therefore also, this order deserves to be quashed and set aside.

(2.) Counsel for the respondents submitted that a detail counter affidavit has been filed by respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 3 and it has been stated that from the very beginning, the appointment of the petitioner is illegal. So far as the post of Stenographer is concerned, at all, he is not promoted to the post of Stenographer. Nonetheless, there is no show cause notice prior to the impugned order is passed, which is at Annexure-9 to the memo of the present petition.

(3.) Having heard counsel for both the sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I hereby, quash and set aside the order, passed by respondent No. 3 dated 27th May, 2006, which is at Annexure-9 to the memo of the present petition mainly for the following facts and reasons :