JUDGMENT AND ORDER : Ajit Singh, J. 1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution is filed against the order dated 23.8.2012 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, whereby it has allowed respondent’s OA No.37/2012. 2. The respondent was appointed as Lower Division Clerk by the Survey Department of India on 19.5.2005. He then appeared in the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination and on the basis of his position in the merit list, vide order dated 1.7.2010, he was promoted to the post of Upper Division Clerk. However, some complaints were made alleging improper evaluation of the answersheets of candidates, who appeared in the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination. The Head of the Department took cognizance of the complaints and constituted a Board of Enquiry to examine the allegations made therein. The Board, after making enquiry, recommended for cancellation of the result and fresh evaluation of the answersheets. Acting upon the recommendation of the Board, the result was cancelled and fresh evaluation of the answersheets was made. And, in the merit list prepared after fresh evaluation, the name of respondent did not find place. The Department, therefore, vide order dated 25.1.2012 demoted him to the post of Lower Division Clerk from the Upper Division Clerk. Admittedly, in the entire process of enquiry and before passing of order dated 25.1.2012, the respondent was not given any opportunity of hearing. Aggrieved, he challenged the order dated 25.1.2012 by filing OA No.37/2012 before the Tribunal. 3. The Tribunal, having regard to the fact that no opportunity of hearing was given to the respondent before passing of order dated 25.1.2012, allowed his OA No.37/2012 by the impugned order dated 23.8.2012 with a direction against the petitioners to reinstate him on the post of Upper Division Clerk. It is in this background, the petitioners have filed the present petition for quashing of order dated 23.8.2012. 4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we find no merit in the present petition. As seen above, the respondent had appeared in the Limited Departmental Competitive Examination and on the basis of his position in the merit list, he was promoted vide order dated 1.7.2010 to the post of Upper Division Clerk. The respondent even worked on the promoted post for almost one year. Admittedly, the answersheet of the respondent was re-valued behind his back, which led to preparation of fresh merit list. The respondent even worked on the promoted post for almost one year. Admittedly, the answersheet of the respondent was re-valued behind his back, which led to preparation of fresh merit list. The Board of Enquiry also did not give any opportunity of hearing to the respondent before recommending re-evaluation of answersheets. And, above all, even before passing of the order dated 25.1.2012 demoting the respondent to the post of Lower Division Clerk, no show-cause notice was issued to him. Apparently, the entire action of the petitioners against the respondent has been in utter violation of the principles of natural justice. And such an action cannot be allowed to sustain. We accordingly uphold the finding of the Tribunal and dismiss the writ petition.