JUDGMENT By this writ petition filed under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner seeks quashing of order dt. 2.7.1986 (Annex.P.6) whereby petitioner was informed that his ·pay fixation shall be on the post of Lower Division Teacher. He further prays for quashing of his pay fixation from 10.9.1979 as Lower Division Teacher and consequent direction that the excess salary paid to the petitioner shall be recovered from his pay. Facts necessary for decision of the present writ petition are that by order dt. 7.9.1979, petitioner was appointed as an Upper Division Teacher with effect from 18.9.1979. Divisional Superintendent of Education, respondent No.3, by his Order dt. 15.10.1979 (Annex P.2) approved his appointment as such. Thereafter by order dt. 5.6.1984, petitioner was selected for B.Ed., training by respondent No.3. While granting aid by order dt. 18.3.1986, for the academic session 1985-1986, the State Government has shown the name of the petitioner as Upper Division Teacher. Pay of the petitioner was fixed as Upper Division Teacher and he was paid salary as such. It was by the impugned order dt. 2.7.1986 (Annex.P.6) petitioner has been informed that as he does not possess Bachelor's Degree in Second class, his appointment as Upper Division Teacher, is disapproved and consequently his salary shall be fixed in the pay scale of Lower Division Teacher. Accordingly while fixing petitioner's pay as Lower Division Teacher (Annex.P.8) with effect from 10.9.1979, it was directed that excess salary paid to the petitioner as Upper Division Teacher shall be recovered from his pay. In spite of service of notice, no body has appeared on behalf of respondents 4 to 6. Return has been filed on behalf of respondents 2, 3 and 6. Mr. Ramesh Shrivastava appears on behalf of petitioner whereas respondents 1, 2 & 3 are represented by Shri S.N. Khare, Mr. Shrivastava raises a very short point and submits that the petitioner was offered salary in the higher scale of pay for about 7 years and without affording any opportunity to the petitioner, pay fixation has been done as a Lower Division Teacher and the salary paid to the petitioner as Upper Division Teacher is also sought to be recovered by the impugned order. He submits that the aforesaid action, without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, is in the teeth of the principle of natural justice and on this ground alone, impugned orders are fit to be quashed. While replying to the assertion made in paragraph 8 of the writ petition, which inter alia incorporates the statements of the petitioner that no opportunity was given to the petitioner, respondents 1 to 3 & 6 have stated in paragraph 8 of the return that "there was no question of any opportunity being given because the petitioner inherently lacks in qualification". Thus the assertion made by the petitioner that the salary given to him on higher pay scale was withdrawn after a lapse of 7 years without any notice, has to be accepted. In my view, same is in the teeth of principle of natural justice and on this ground alone, the impugned orders cannot be sustained. Respondents shall give opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within 6 weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Petitioner shall have liberty to give reply to the same within 6 weeks from the date of its receipt. Respondent shall decide the matter in accordance with law, expeditiously. In the result, the writ petition is allowed, with the direction aforesaid. Impugned order dated 2.7.1986 (Annexure P.6) and that portion of pay fixation (Annexure P.8) so far as it relates to fixation of salary of the petitioner from 10.9.1979 and recovery from his salary of the excess amount paid to the petitioner, are quashed. No recovery shall be made from the petitioner till the decision as aforesaid is taken nor he shall be paid the salary as Upper Division Teacher till the matter is decided by the respondents as directed above. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. Security amount, if deposited be refunded to the petitioner.