M. K. Sharma, J. (Oral) ( 1 ). This is a writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 3. 2. 1997 passed by the Disciplinary Authority dismissing the petitioner from service of the Company with immediate effect as also the order passed by the Appellate Authority on 6. 5. 1997. ( 2 ). On perusal of the averments made in the writ petition, I am of the opinion, that this writ petition could be disposed of on a very short point raised by the petitioner that disposal of his appeal by the appellate authority is not in accordance with law and violative of the specific Rules and also the principles of natural justice. ( 3 ). My attention has been drawn to the order dated 6. 5. 1997 passed by the Appellate Authority. The relevant portion of the said order being paragraph 2 is extracted below: "as the Appellate Authority, I had called for and seen all the papers and records of the case including the proceedings of the Enquiry. I have given a very careful thought to the case and particularly to the Appeal made to me. I am satisfied that the Disciplinary Authority has acted in a just manner and do not consider it necessary to interfere with the orders passed by the Disciplinary Authority. " ( 4 ). The respondents have a set of Conduct Rules known as BHEL CDA Rules, 1975. Rule 32 of the said Rules deals with the procedure and the manner in which the appeal filed in a disciplinary proceeding is to be disposed of. Relevant portion of the said Rule states that the appellate authority shall consider whether the findings are justified or whether the penalty is excessive or inadequate and pass appropriate orders within three months of the date of the appeal confirming, enhancing, reducing or setting aside the penalty or remitting the case to the authority which imposed the penalty or to any other authority with such direction as it may deem fit in the circumstances of the case. ( 5 ). ( 5 ). The issue, therefore, that arises for my consideration is whether the manner in which the appeal has been disposed of by the appellate authority could be said to be an appropriate and proper disposal of the appeal in terms of Rule 32 of the Conduct Rules and also whether there is violation of the principles of natural justice. The particular Rule pre supposes that the appellate authority while disposing of the appeal has to consider whether the findings are justified and whether the penalty is excessive or not and upon assessment and weighment of the same dispose of the appeal. ( 6 ). It is by now settled law that in absence of a requirement in the Statute or the Rules, there is no duty cast on the appellate authority to give reasons for its decision when the order is one of affirmance. However, when the Rule uses the word `consider the same would call for an objective assessment and proper application of mind, which must be reflected from the order itself. In Ram Chander Vs. Union of India and others reported in AIR 1986 S. C. 1173 it was held by the Supreme Court that the word `consider has different shades of meaning and must in Rule 22 (2) in the context of which it appears, mean an objective consideration by the Railway Board after due application of mind which implies giving of reasons for its decision. Almost to the same effect is the decision of the Supreme Court in R. P. Bhatt Vs. Union of India, A. I. R. 1986 S. C. 1040. My attention has also been drawn to another decision of the Supreme Court in State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur Vs. Prabhu Dayal Grover reported in (1995) 6 S. C. C. 279, wherein a similar expression with that of the present provision came to be considered by the Supreme Court. In the said decision, Regulation 70 (2) came to be considered by the Supreme Court wherein, the appellate authority was required to consider whether the findings recorded against the officer concerned are justified and/or whether the penalty is excessive or inadequate and pass appropriate orders confirming, enhancing, reducing or setting aside the penalty or remitting the case to the authority which imposed the penalty or to any other authority with such directions as it deems fit in the circumstances of the case. The Supreme Court held that the said Regulation does not obligate the appellate authority to give any reasons for its order. The Supreme Court, however, hastened to add that assuming, that by necessary implication the said Regulation also requires the appellate authority to give the reasons, still its order cannot be invalidated, as it was found that the appellate authority had discharged its obligation by considering the records and proceedings pertaining to the disciplinary action and the submissions made by the respondent. So also is the decision of the Supreme Court in Balwant Singh and another Vs. State of Haryana, 1994 (Supp) 2 S. C. C. 471. ( 7 ). In the present case, however, the appellate authority apparently was required to consider the case whether the findings were justified or not and also whether the penalty is excessive or not or whether the same is inadequate. The order passed by the Appellate Authority does not reflect any finding or opinion of the appellate authority on the aforesaid issues. The appellate authority in terms of the expression used in the Conduct Rules is required to assess the findings and also the nature of punishment awarded to the delinquent officer and after an objective assessment has to record his decision on both the issues which must be reflected from the order itself. Here in this case the appellate authority has given no finding at all as to whether the finds are justified or not, nor the appellate authority has considered whether the penalty imposed is excessive or not. Disposal of the appeal is not an empty formality as the same is a statutory obligation of the appellate authority which must be discharged with due care and attention. ( 8 ). In that view of the matter. I am of the considered opinion that the order of the appellate authority does not conform to the requirements under the Rules and, therefore, the said order is liable to be set aside, which I hereby do. Having done so, I remit the appeal to the appellate authority for re-consideration which shall be re-considered and disposed of afresh in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from today. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of, but without any costs.