JUDGMENT : G.K. Misra, C.J. - The Petitioner was a Sub-Inspector of Orissa. A proceeding was drawn up against him on various charges. He was suspended from service on 11-4-1961 and was reinstated on 21-12-1962. He was exonerated on benefit of doubt. An order was passed under Rule 91(3) of the Orissa Service Code. The Deputy Inspector-General of Police passed the following order: During the period under suspension the delinquent shall not draw anything more than subsistence allowance to which he is entitled. The period will be counted as duty only for the purpose of pension. The Inspector-General of Police, by his order dated 29-7-1965 modified the aforesaid order in the following terms: During the period-under suspension, the Appellant shall not draw anything more than the subsistence allowance to which he is entitled. The entire period shall be counted as duty only for the purpose of pension, except that the period from 21-12-1962 to 16-5-1963 shall also be counted towards leave and inurement. 2. The Petitioner has filed this writ application to challenge the impugned order, as being contrary to the principles of natural justice. 3. The opposite parties have not filed any counter affidavit. 4. The only question for consideration is whether the Petitioner was entitled to a show cause notice before the impugned order was passed. Rule 91(3) of the Orissa Service Code, Volume I, runs thus: In other cases, the Government servant shall be given such pay and allowances as such competent authority may prescribe. Provided that the payment of allowances under Clause (3) shall be subject to all other conditions under which such allowances are admissible. Provided further that such proportion of such pay and allowances shall not be less than the subsistence and other allowances admissible under Rule 90. The sub-rule clearly vests the discretion in the competent authority to give certain portion of the pay and allowances as it thinks proper in the facts and circumstances of the particular case, subject to its not being reduced 'below a particular minimum. Mr. Mohanty contends that reduction of pay and allowances affects emoluments and civil rights and consequently no action adverse to the delinquent should be taken unless a reasonable opportunity is afforded to him to justify his stand that he is entitled to entire pay and allowances during the period of suspension. 5. The contention appear's to be well founded. Mr. Mohanty contends that reduction of pay and allowances affects emoluments and civil rights and consequently no action adverse to the delinquent should be taken unless a reasonable opportunity is afforded to him to justify his stand that he is entitled to entire pay and allowances during the period of suspension. 5. The contention appear's to be well founded. Till the impugned order was passed no notice was ever given to the Petitioner that an order adverse to him was going to be passed. He had been given only an opportunity to meet the charges at the first stage and to have his say against the proposed punishment before the final order was passed. The impugned order was passed only after he was exonerated in the proceeding and no notice was given to him that he was going to be adversely affectedly by the impugned order. The concept of the principle of natural justice has now received a wide connotation It is now elementary that where civil rights are affected, the aggrieved party is entitled to notice and reasonable opportunity to have his say in support of his case. The aforesaid view is fully supported by the decision of this Court in Brahmananda Satpathy Vs. State of Orissa. We accordingly uphold the contention urged that the impugned order must be quashed. 6. In the result the impugned order is quashed, and the writ application is allowed with costs. Hearing fee Rs. 100/- (One hundred only). 7. It need hardly be stated that it is open to the Inspector General of Police to give a reasonable opportunity to the Petitioner to have his say and then pass an order in accordance with the provisions of Rule 91. R.N. Misra, J. 8. I agree. Final Result : Allowed