JUDGMENT BISWANATH RATH, J.: In filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief : (i) quash the impugned order No. 48565 dated 20.11.2006 as at Annexure-8; (ii) Hold/declare that the withdrawal/cancellation of the approval of the promotion of the petitioner to the post of Accountant from the post of Jr. Clerk-cum-Typist by the Opp. Parties is arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional, and is liable to be set aside/quashed; and (iii) Pass such other orders/direction as would deem fit and proper. 2. The petitioner’s case is that he was appointed as Junior Clerk-cum-Typist vide office order no.95 dated 19.1.1985 as appearing at Annexure-1 issued by the Principal, Anchal College, Padampur (O.P. NO. 3) which post, he joined on 23.1.1985. When the petitioner was continuing as Junior Clerk-cum-Typist, which post he claimed to be an approved post, the Principal of the college submitted proposal before the Director, Higher Education, Orissa (O.P. No.2) for approval of the appointment of the petitioner in the post of Junior Clerk-cum-Typist. At this stage, the petitioner was next promoted to the post of Accountant with effect from 1.6.1991 against the post created vide GO No.59612 dated 17.12.1992 (Annexure-3) following a Governing Body Resolution No.9 dated 31.1.99 (Annexure-2). Petitioner further submitted that the post of Accountant to which he has been appointed, was created with the approval of the Government as indicated in the Government of Orissa Department of Education Letter No.59612 dated 17.12.1992 (Annexure-3). At page-16 of the brief, petitioner has enclosed a document establishing approval of the post of Accountant by the Government in respect of Anchal College, Padmapur. Since the petitioner was promoted to the post of Accountant, the Principal of the college also was making approach to the Director (O.P.2) for release of the grant-in-aid against the post of Accountant. Since the request of the Principal in the matter of approval relating to the petitioner in the post of Junior Clerk-cum-Typist and the approval for subsequent promotion to the post of Accountant remained unattended, the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court in W.P.(C) No. 1559 of 2002 for necessary direction to the Director in the above regard. W.P.(C) No. 1559 of 2002 was heard and disposed of by order dated 16.5.2002 directing therein the Director (O.P. No.2) to take a decision on the proposals as well as the representations as submitted by the petitioner within a specific period of time. W.P.(C) No. 1559 of 2002 was heard and disposed of by order dated 16.5.2002 directing therein the Director (O.P. No.2) to take a decision on the proposals as well as the representations as submitted by the petitioner within a specific period of time. In the said writ petition, opposite party no.1 was also given direction to take decision in the matter within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the recommendation of the Director (O.P. no.2) in the matter of approval in respect of the petitioner. Following the direction of this Court in the above mentioned writ petition, necessary verification was made at the level of Higher Education Department and consequent upon such exercise, the Joint Secretary to the Government of Orissa in the Department of Higher Education vide communication No. 9765 dated 15.3.2005 communicated the Director, Higher Education Department the Government decision according concurrence to the approval of one post in favour of Anchal College, Padmapur in the matter of payment of grant-in-aid with effect from 1.6.1990 @ 1/3rd, 1.6.1992 @ 2/3rd and 1.6.1994 @ full. As per the submission of the petitioner the said concurrence was made in respect of Junior Clerk-cum-Typist post concerning Shri Radhakanta Panda, present petitioner. To support this above submission the petitioner drawn my attention to the document vide Annexure-4 to the writ petition. 3. Following the above concurrence, the Director of Higher Education, Odisha issued communication vide order no. 1650 dated 31.3.2005 endorsing therein the grant of grant-in-aid in favour of the petitioner in the manner indicated herein above. It is stated here that while issuing the aforesaid order, the Direcor, Higher Education, Odisha (O.P.No.2) categorically mentioned that the above order was issued in accordance with the order dated 16.5.2002 passed in W.P.(C) No. 1559 of 2002 and pursuant to the Government Order No. 9765/HE dated 15.3.2005 in terms of paragraphs 9(3), 10(13) & 16(1) of GIA order, 1994. Petitioner further submitted that while the matter stood as above, the Director, Higher Education, Odisha by office order No. 23977 dated 23.5.2006 accorded his approval for promotion of the petitioner from the post of Junior clerk-cum-Typist to the post of Accountant (Anchal College, Padmapur) with effect from 16.1.1999 as against a created and vacant post in the scale of pay of 4000-100-6000/- as appearing at Annexure-6. Following the above approval, the Assistant Director, Higher Education, Odisha released pay/authority slip as against the petitioner holding the post of accountant allowing him to draw the scale of pay of Rs.4,000-100-6000/- at the rate of salary of Rs.4,000-6,000/- per month from 1.11.2005, as clearly appearing at Annexure-7. The petitioner allege that while the matter stood as above and the petitioner was performing his duty unblemishly, he was slapped with the office order No. 48565 dated 20.11.2006 issued by the Director, Higher Education, Odisha, Bhubaneswar vide office order No. 48565 dated 20.11.2006 (Annexure-8) thereby withdrawing the promotion of the petitioner to the post of Accountant. In assailing the above order, the petitioner substantiates his claim on the following grounds : (i) the impugned order under Annexure-8 was passed without affording any reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner; (ii) the impugned order also suffers in law as it is opposed to the provisions contained in rule 10 of Orissa Non-Government Aided College Ministerial Service (Method of Recruitment and Conditions of Service) of Rules, 1999 which clearly provides promotion to the post of Junior Accountant from the post of senior clerks. (iii) the impugned withdrawal order also suffers being contrary to the guidelines vide Government Order No. 41516 dated 31.8.1999 which clearly permits promotion of Junior Clerk to a promotional post subject to his/her passing preliminary/final Accounts examination. It is worth mentioning here that the petitioner has passed both the preliminary as well as final Accounts examination as submitted by him in para-14 which fact is not controverted by the State in their counter. (iv) the impugned withdrawal order also remained unlawful being contrary to the direction passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No. 1559 of 2002 and by such action, the opposite parties have attempted overreaching the direction of this Court. Per contra, State-opposite parties, by filing their counter affidavit, submitted that their impugned action is an outcome of the circular No.XE/C-166/77-19462/EYS dt.27.5.78 (Annexure-A/1). The opposite party no.1 further justified its action on the ground that promoting the petitioner in the post of Accountant was in absence of prior sanction of the Administrative Department and further in absence of consultation by the Finance Department and P & C Department, before creation of such post. In support of their case, the State has relied upon the circular as appearing at Annexure-A/1. In support of their case, the State has relied upon the circular as appearing at Annexure-A/1. On scrutiny of the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of opposite party no.1, it is observed that the State has fully rested on Annexure-A/1 while defending its case. Having heard learned counsel for both sides, the following issues emerge for determination of the case : A) Whether the promotion of the petitioner to the post of Accountant was in absence of a post of Accountant and approval of competent Authority ? B) Whether the impugned order vide Annexure-8 is in absence of compliance of Natural Justice ? Now coming to the first issue, the submission of the petitioner in this regard is that post of Accountant was approved by the competent authority and in justifying his such claim, he had drawn my attention to the document vide Annexure-3. This is an office order issued by Government of Orissa in the Department of Education clearly indicating therein the creation of different posts in the non-teaching side in 19 Non-Government Colleges. The document further discloses creation of five Non-teaching posts such as (i) Graduate Librarian, (ii) Lib.Watchman-cum-Bearer, (iii) Accountant, (iv) Duftary and (v) Lady Attendant, particularly in the Anchal College. It is needless to mention here that the petitioner was holder of the post of Accountant being created by the competent authority as appearing at Annexure-3. Accordingly this issue is answered favourably holding that the post of Accountant was created with approval of competent Authority and following the appointment of the petitioner as an Accountant, his pay was also approved by the Director, Higher Education, Orissa (O.P. No.2) who has issued the pay/authority slip against the post of Accountant in favour of the petitioner as clearly appearing vide Annexure-7 of the writ petition. Coming to the second issue, it is observed that the impugned order vide Annexure-8 is not only a bald one, at the same time, it has been passed in absence of the principles of Natural Justice since before passing the impugned order of withdrawal of a promotion in favour of the petitioner, he was not at all provided with any opportunity. The counter filed by the State-O.Ps. is also completely silent in that regard. Law never permits passing of such punitive orders. In absence compliance of Natural Justice, this issue is accordingly answered in favour of the petitioner. The counter filed by the State-O.Ps. is also completely silent in that regard. Law never permits passing of such punitive orders. In absence compliance of Natural Justice, this issue is accordingly answered in favour of the petitioner. Under the above facts and circumstances and particularly in view of the finding arrived at, I hold the impugned order vide Annexure-8 as bad in law and non-existent in the eye of law, which I set aside and I direct the opposite parties to treat the petitioner as continuing in the post of Accountant and release all consequential relief within a period of two months hence. The writ petition succeeds. However, there shall be no order as to costs.