Order Heard Mr. Sujit Narayan Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and also Mr. M. Khan on behalf of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved on account of fixation of his salary in I.DA pay scale calculating it on the basis of GOI (29) under FR-22. The said calculation has resulted in reduction of his monthly salary. A general order dated 4th March, 2008 was issued under the signature of respondent no. 2 whereby fixation of pay of external candidates who had joined BSNL from other Departments as Junior Account$ Officer was treated as fresh candidate against direct recruitment quota as provided in Fundamental Rules 22. Another order was passed on 12th August, 2009 under the signature of respondent no. 5 and the petitioner's pay scale was refixed reducing the pay scale from Rs. 9,850- 250-14,600 to 6,500-200-10,500. The petitioner has also made a prayer for his pay scale which he would receive at the time of induction in the service of the respondents i.e. in the scale of Rs. 9,850250-14,600. 3. Counsel for the petitioner has placed an office order, advertisement etc. to demonstrate that there was an offer of appointment vide Annexure-1. The candidates from the other Departments were invited to join in the post of JAO in BSNL to IDA pay scale of Rs. 9,850-250-14,600 in terms and conditions mentioned in BSNL Letter No. 4-85/2003 SEA-BSNL dated 5th November, 2004. 4. Pursuant to the aforesaid offer of appointment, the petitioner submitted his resignation which was accepted by the Chief Postmaster General, Bihar Circle, Patna vide order dated 112.2005. He was the previous appointing authority of the petitioner. This resignation was accepted on his permanent absorption by BSNL, a Government of India Enterprises per communication letter dated 8.2.2005. The terms were detailed in Appendix-2 of the CCS Pension Rules, 1972, as amended from time to time. Name of the petitioner alongwith three others figures at SI. No. 121. There was no controversy since the petitioner received salary in the revised pay scale and in confirmation with the terms and conditions of his appointment. The dispute arose only after the respondents is-sued a letter dated 12.8.2009 bringing to the notice of the petitioner that there was a miscalculation and an excessive payment to the tune of Rs. 3 Lac and odd, made to the petitioner. 5. The dispute arose only after the respondents is-sued a letter dated 12.8.2009 bringing to the notice of the petitioner that there was a miscalculation and an excessive payment to the tune of Rs. 3 Lac and odd, made to the petitioner. 5. The aforesaid miscalculation was treated to be on the basis of interpretation of FR-22 which evidently is not applicable in the case of the petitioner. The submission is that FR-22 relates to the candidates who are directly appointed after being selected by the Government of India whereas the petitioner is not a original recruit at the time of joining BSNL. He had already put in considerable length of service in Telecommunication Department and only after he had appeared in an examination held in the month of December, 2000 in which the petitioner was declared qualified to be appointed as Junior Accounts Officer where his name appeared at SI. No. 26. An offer was made by the BSNL on 24.1.2003 for giving appointment to the external candidates-subject to their tendering rejection in the respective cadre in accordance with the Rules of the Government of India. 6. The petitioner was issued an appointment order on 18th January, 2000 in the pay scale of Rs. 9,850-250-14,600, as mentioned in the offer letter no. 4-85/ 2003 SEA BSNL dated 5.11.2007. The petitioner's counsel has seriously contested the action of the respondents and asserted that the petitioner has been put to a heavy loss for no fault on his part. The BSNL has changed its stance unilaterally without giving any opportunity of hearing. 7. Learned counsel appearing for the BSNL has filed a counter affidavit but has unequivocally agreed that the impugned order has been passed without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 8. In view of this, I am of the considered view that all these anomalies require a factual calculation as well as the question of applicability of rules etc. Therefore, let the matter be sent back to the authority concerned who shall issue notice to the petitioner and after giving him a proper hearing, decide the question afresh in accordance with law taking into consideration that he is not a fresh appointee and at the time when he was absorbed by the BSNL and required to resign from his parent Department, the terms and conditions in the letter no. 485/2003-SEA BSNL, Clause-(xi) clearly stated as under: "(xi) On appointment as JAO on probation on successful completion of basic induction course of training the external candidates will be placed in the IDA pay scale of 9,850-250-14,600 (Equivalent of CDA pay scale of Rs. 6,500-200-10,500 in BSNL). The pay protection vis-a-vis their substantive grade in their parent department shall be pro. vided in BSNL, however their earlier service rendered either in DOT or in BSNL, on deputation basis, shall not count for any purpose including seniority." 9. Thus, I am of the considered view that the petitioner should be given an opportunity of hearing and after taking into consideration I their objections and also anomaly that has crept up at the subsequent stage whereby the petitioner has been suddenly faced with a situation causing loss to him, requires a fresh decision. 10. The impugned order dated 12.8.2009 (Annexure-14) issued by the BSNL relating to pay fixation on IDA pay on appointment (revised) is hereby quashed. The recovery of the so-called excess amount paid on the part of the BSNL shall be kept in abeyance till a final order is passed after taking into consideration all the aspects which has been discussed hereinabove and also the objections raised by the petitioner. 11. With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.