Sudhir Agarwal, J. - (1.) WRIT petition is directed against the order dated 5.8.2006 having adverse consequences to petitioners and the same has been assailed on the ground that the aforesaid order has been passed without any show cause notice or opportunity of hearing to petitioners though the aforesaid order visits civil consequences to petitioners. It is submitted that petitioners were given promotional scale by order dated 20.2.2002 but the same has been withdrawn without any show cause notice or opportunity to petitioners. The averment that no opportunity was given has been averred in para 11 of the writ petition and in the counter affidavit, no averment has been made that the impugned order was passed after giving any show cause notice of opportunity to petitioners.
(2.) IT is well settled that no order adverse to interest of any person ought to have been passed in violation of principle of natural justice. It cannot be disputed that the impugned order has civil consequences to the petitioners. In State of Orissa Vs. Dr. (Miss) Binapanni Dei and others : AIR 1967 SC 1269 the Apex Court said: It is true that the order is administrative in character, but even an administrative order which involves civil consequences as already stated must be made consistently with the rules of natural justice after informing the first respondent of the case of the State, the evidence in support thereof and after giving an opportunity to the first respondent of being heard and meeting or explaining the evidence. No such steps were admittedly taken; the High Court was, in our judgment, right in setting aside the order of the State.
(3.) THE Apex Court in Bhagwan Shukla Vs. Union of India & others : AIR 1994 SC 2480 has held: ... fair play in action warrants that no such order which has the effect of an employee suffering civil consequences should be passed without putting the concerned to notice and giving him a hearing in the matter.;