JUDGMENT Hon’ble S.U. Khan, J.—This is a child labour matter. The Court is repeatedly finding that Deputy Labour Commissioners are issuing recovery notices without hearing the person concerned. This practice is highly deprecated. In the instant case, recovery certificate has been issued by Deputy Labour Commissioner, Allahabad. During last two weeks, about four or five such notices issued by Deputy Labour Commissioner, Allahabad have been challenged before this Court. 2. Deputy Labour Commissioner, Allahabad as well as all the authorities in U.P. dealing with the matter of child labour are strictly directed to first issue show cause notice to the employers and after hearing them, the authority concerned must determine as to whether in fact the employer has engaged any child labour or not. Without issuing show cause notice, notice demanding money (Rs. 20,000 per child labour) is not in accordance with law. Whatever wrong is alleged to have been done by a person, neither he can be punished nor order of redressal may be passed unless the said person has been heard in opposition to the allegation. The Court hopes that in future, recovery proceedings will not be initiated without providing opportunity of hearing to the person concerned as to whether he has engaged child labour or not? Merely on the basis of survey, recovery proceedings cannot be initiated. Survey report may be a strong piece of evidence, however, unless employer is provided opportunity to lead evidence in rebuttal, finding cannot be recorded and without recording finding that an employer has engaged some child labour, recovery cannot be made or recovery certificate cannot be issued. 3. In the instant case, Deputy Labour Commissioner, Allahabad issued recovery notice to the petitioner on 9.6.2008 directing him to pay Rs. 40,000/- within 15 days from the date of receipt of notice as he was found to have engaged two child labours during some survey. Thereafter, recovery certificate was sent by Deputy Labour Commissioner, Allahabad to Collector, Pratapgarh on 30.7.2008, copy of which is Annexure-3 to the writ petition. Thereafter, petitioner filed objections on 9.9.2008, copy of which is Annexure-4 to the writ petition. 4. Writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the petitioner to appear before Deputy Labour Commissioner, Allahabad on 11.11.2008 along with certified copy of this judgment and fresh objections, evidence, if any, which he wants to adduce in respect of his case. 5. Thereafter, petitioner filed objections on 9.9.2008, copy of which is Annexure-4 to the writ petition. 4. Writ petition is disposed of with the direction to the petitioner to appear before Deputy Labour Commissioner, Allahabad on 11.11.2008 along with certified copy of this judgment and fresh objections, evidence, if any, which he wants to adduce in respect of his case. 5. In the first instance, until 11.11.2008, recovery proceedings shall remain stayed. If on 11.11.2008, petitioner appears before Deputy Labour Commissioner, Allahabad along with aforesaid documents, then until decision by the Deputy Labour Commissioner, recovery proceedings shall remain in abeyance. However, if more than one adjournment after 11.11.2008 is sought by the petitioner, recovery proceedings shall be revived. 6. With the above observations, writ petition is disposed of. 7. Office is directed to supply a copy of this order free of cost to learned Chief Standing Counsel by 21.10.2008. Learned Standing Counsel is directed to send a copy of this order to Deputy Labour Commissioner, Allahabad and another copy to the concerned Secretary for being circulated to all the Deputy Labour Commissioners of U.P. or such authorities who are dealing with child labour matters. ————