ASHOK BHUSHAN, J. ( 1 ) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing appearing for the respondent. ( 2 ) THE petitioner claims that he was appointed vide appointment order dated 16. 3. 82 on a class-IV post on temporary basis in work charge establishment. Petitioner joined on 16. 3. 82 and thereafter, he was continuing in Work Charge Establishment. According to the petitioner, there was regular vacancies in the Irrigation Division, Ballia Division-I. The petitioner was giving appointment in regular establishment as Class-IV employees vide order dated 9. 1. 97 on the recommendation of departmental selection committee. The order dated 29. 1. 97 was cancelled by subsequent order dated 10. 4. 97. (Annexure-9 to the writ petition ). Petitioner has stated that he was not given any notice or opportunity before passing the impugned order dated 10. 4. 97. A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State. ( 3 ) IN reply to paragraph 17 it is not denied that petitioner was not given any notice but the case of the respondents is that petitioners appointment was not done in accordance with the procedure prescribed for the regularisation. Hence, appointment was void abinition, therefore no notice was acquired. ( 4 ) I have considered the respective submissions made by the learned Counsel for both the parties -. The petitioner having been issued appointment order in the regular establishment, he acquired right to continue in the regular establishment. Since the order dated 10. 4. 97 cancelling the order of petitioners regular appointment is adversely affecting his rights, he is entitled for a notice before passing of such an order against him. Even if the respondents were alleging certain procedural irregularities, the said breach of procedure may or may not invalidate appointment. The order dated 10. 4. 97 admittedly having been passed without notice is wholly illegal and against the principle of natural justice. ( 5 ) IN view of the above fact, the order dated 10. 4. 97 is quashed and the respondents are directed to pass order afresh after giving notice and adequate opportunity to the petitioner. .