JUDGEMENT M.R. Verma, J. (Retd.) Chairman (Oral).: The applicant in this original application has called in question the order Annexure-P/3 and has prayed that the said order may be quashed and respondents be directed to give work charge status to the applicant w. e. f. January 1, 1996. 2. In brief the admitted and relevant facts are that the services of the applicant were regularised as a Fitter vide Annexure-P/1 dated May 11, 2004 and pursuant to such regularsation the applicant joined his duties and was posted in Irrigation & Public Health Sub and Division Rohroo with headquarter at Kanshakoti vide Annexure-P/2 dated May 12, 2004. However, the order of regularisation of the applicant was withdrawn by respondent No. 3 vide Annexure-P/3 without issuing any show cause notice or affording any hearing to the applicant. In these circumstances the applicant claims that the impugned order is violative of principles of natural justice and deserves to the quashed. 3. In the reply filed by the respondents the action taken by respondent No. 3 is sought to be justified but it not in dispute that the order Annexure-P/1 has been cancelled without any notice or affording a hearing to the applicant It is however, mentioned in the order Annexure-P/3 that regularisation order Annexure-P/1 being invalid show cause notice or principles of natural justice is not involved in this case to be issued before cancellation of the appointment order." 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondent State in view of the aforesaid undisputed facts. 5. The principles of natural justice is one of the foremost products of civilized jurisprudence and are grounded in justice, equity and good conscious. The principles of natural justice have all along been applied to judicial as well as quashi judicial Tribunals. Such rule which is respected the world over cannot be immolated or sacrificed at the alter of administrative celerity. By now it is well settled that principles of natural justice equally applies to the administrative actions. 6. The principles of natural justice have all along been applied to judicial as well as quashi judicial Tribunals. Such rule which is respected the world over cannot be immolated or sacrificed at the alter of administrative celerity. By now it is well settled that principles of natural justice equally applies to the administrative actions. 6. The rule of audi-alteram-partem i.e. that no man shall be condemned unheard and a fair opportunity of being heard should be afforded to him is a cardinal principal of justice and violation of this rule even in the discharge of administrative duties which may adversely affect a person and where the contrary is not provided by law shall vitiate the order/action. 7. In the case in hand the services of the applicant were regularised by the orders of respondent No.3 vide Annexure-P/1 which were passed pursuant to the communication received from the Engineer-in-Chief i.e. respondent No.2. The impugned order undisputably and apparently affects the applicant adversely, therefore, before passing the impugned order the applicant ought to have been given an opportunity of being heard. The respondent No.3 having not done so has passed the impugned order in violation of principles of natural justice which vitiates the impugned order. 8. In view of above the impugned order Annexure-P/3 is quashed and status quo as existed immediately before passing of impugned order is ordered to be restored. It is however, clarified that the respondents are at liberty to re-examine the matter regarding regularisation of the services of the applicant or to give him work charge status keeping in view the aforesaid principle of natural justice and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Mool Raj Upatdhyaya Versus State of HP. & ors. (1994 Supp. (2) SCC 316) was pass appropriate order on such reexamination. This original application is allowed in terms of above orders.