Order The present petition has been preferred mainly for the reasons that though the G.P.F. amount was passed on 31st of July 2005, but, the amount was paid on 13th of July, 2006 and unnecessarily for approximately one year the said amount of Rs. 6,13,874/- has been retained by the concerned respondents. It has also been stated by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that likewise vide order dated 14th of November, 2005 (Annexure-5 to the memo of the petition) approximately an amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- is ordered to be deducted from the retirement benefits. This deduction starts from August, 1967 to January, 2004. It is stated by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that no notice and no opportunity of being heard was ever given to the present petitioner otherwise, the petitioner would have pointed out, that amount was never paid wrongly to the present petitioner and, therefore, notice at Annexure-5 deserves to be quashed and set aside. 2. 1 have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents who has submitted that as stated in the counter affidavit sizeable amount was paid for the retirement benefit by cheque no. 293923 dated 13th of July, 2006 detailed of the payment has been given in paragraph-5 to the counter affidavit so far as the deduction of the amount from the retirement benefit is concerned as stated in Annexure-5 to the memo of the petition. If the amount is paid by mistake it is bound to be returned by the present petitioner and, therefore, Annexure-5 order has been passed by the concerned respondents. 3. Having heard learned counsel for both sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that:- (i) the present petitioner retired on 31st of July, 2005, but, was not paid retirement benefits including gratuity, G.P.F. leave encashment etc. and, therefore, the present petition was preferred. After preferring the present petition, the amount was offered by the respondents as stated in paragraph-5 to the counter affidavit. (ii) the following amount has been paid by the respondents to the petitioner vide cheque no. 293923 dated 13th of July, 2006. SI. Particulars Amount 1. Gratuity Rs. 3,80,022.00 2. Leave Encashment Rs. 1,18,416.00 3. G.S.S. Rs. 51,258.00 4. Pension Arrear Rs. 72,752.00 5. G.P.F. Rs. 6,13,874.00 Total Rs. 12,36,322.00 Thus, sizeable amount of approximately Rs. (ii) the following amount has been paid by the respondents to the petitioner vide cheque no. 293923 dated 13th of July, 2006. SI. Particulars Amount 1. Gratuity Rs. 3,80,022.00 2. Leave Encashment Rs. 1,18,416.00 3. G.S.S. Rs. 51,258.00 4. Pension Arrear Rs. 72,752.00 5. G.P.F. Rs. 6,13,874.00 Total Rs. 12,36,322.00 Thus, sizeable amount of approximately Rs. 12,36,000/- has been paid to the petitioner. (iii) the amount of G.P.F. has been paid late by one year and, therefore, it is prayed that interest ought to be paid. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner shall prefer representation before the concerned respondent authority, for getting the "interest if it is legally admissible under the law, rules, regulations and policies. So far as Annexure-5 order for deduction of sizeable amount is concerned, it appears that no notice was ever issued to the petitioner nor any opportunity of being heard was ever given to the petitioner and an order at Annexure-5 dated 14th of November, 2005 has been passed by the concerned respondent authority and, therefore, I hereby quash and set aside the order passed at Annexure-5 dated 14th of November, 2005. Bare minimum requirement, of principles of natural justice ought to have been followed, before withdrawing the right, already accrued in favour of the petitioner or before withdrawal of any benefit already accrued to the petitioner. Admittedly, no hearing and no opportunity of being heard was given to the petitioner stating the reason that the amount was paid to the petitioner was incorrect and was not in consonance of law and facts. Thus, respondents are permitted to follow the procedure established by law or to follow at least bare minimum principles of natural justice and thereafter only such order can be passed. I hereby quash and set aside the order dated 14th of November, 2005 as the same was issued in gross violation of principles of natural justice. 5. In view of the aforesaid facts and reasons, the writ petition is hereby partly allowed. If the petitioner prefers representation before the concerned respondent authority, within a period of six weeks from today the concerned respondent authority shall decide the same within a period of further four weeks in accordance with law, rules. regulations and policy applicable so far as the interest part is concerned and looking to the reasons for the procedural delay in the payment. 6. regulations and policy applicable so far as the interest part is concerned and looking to the reasons for the procedural delay in the payment. 6. In view of the aforesaid observation, this writ petition is disposed of.