Administrative recovery orders issued without a hearing violate natural justice and require fresh statutory inquiry.

The applicant, a Nursing Orderly, was placed under suspension in April 2017 following the registration of an F.I.R. (No. 09/2017) by the VOK, Kashmir

After being arrested and subsequently released, the applicant submitted a joining report and was permitted to resume his duties

In June 2021, the respondents issued an impugned communication and recovery notice seeking to recover an amount of Rs. 28,64,733/- from the applicant’s salary

The applicant challenged these orders before the Tribunal, primarily alleging that the recovery was initiated without providing him an opportunity of being heard

During the proceedings, the respondents filed a reply affidavit stating they would not proceed without adhering to due process and statutory requirements

1. Whether the impugned recovery notice and communication were legally sustainable given the alleged violation of the principles of natural justice

2. Whether the respondents could proceed with the recovery without following the mandated statutory inquiry process

The court applied the fundamental legal principle of Audi Alteram Partem (the right to be heard), emphasizing that no adverse order involving financial recovery can be passed without affording a "reasonable opportunity of being heard"

It further relied on the requirement of adhering to the "due process of law" and "statutory requirements" governing administrative actions and departmental inquiries against government employees

The Tribunal analyzed the applicant's "star ground" that the recovery order was passed "at his back" without any hearing

The court noted the respondents' categoric admission in their reply affidavit dated 23-03-2026, wherein they conceded that no recovery process would be initiated without following due process and providing the applicant an opportunity to defend himself

The court found that because the respondents themselves admitted the necessity of a fresh inquiry and adherence to statutory mandates, the original impugned communication dated 07-06-2021 could not stand

The Tribunal determined that the appropriate course of action was to quash the existing order and allow the respondents to proceed only through a fresh, legally compliant enquiry

The court directed the respondents to conduct a fresh enquiry into the matter in accordance with the law, ensuring the applicant is given an ample opportunity to be heard. The enquiry is ordered to be culminated within a period of three months

The Tribunal clarified that it was not commenting on the merits of any pending criminal cases against the applicant. The O.A. was disposed of with no order as to costs