Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 446 (MP)

Aziz Qureshi v. State of M. P.

2005-03-28

AJIT SINGH

body2005
JUDGMENT This petition was originally filed before the Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur. The Tribunal has been abolished by the State Government and as such the petition has reached this Court for its adjudication. By this petition, the delinquent employee has prayed for quashing of orders Annexure A-I dated 4.2.1993 and Annexure A-2 dated 21.11.1995 passed by the Disciplinary Authority (respondent No.3) and Appellate Authority (respondent No.2) respectively whereby he has been inflicted with a penalty of withholding of two increments with cumulative effect. The petitioner was working on the post of Lower Division Clerk in the Commercial Tax Depal1ment of the State Government. He was charge sheeted on five charges. The Enquiry Officer in his rep0l1 found all the charges proved against the petitioner. The Disciplinary Authority (respondent No.3) accepted the report of the Enquiry Officer and passed the order on 4.3.1993, Annexure A-1 of punishment as mentioned above. The Appellate Authority (respondent No.2) also dismissed appeal Annexure A-20 of the petitioner by order dated 21.11.1995 Annexure A-2. Shri Ramesh Shri vastava, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the order dated 21.11.1995 Annexure A-2 passed by the Appellate Authority (respondent No.2) is not a speaking order and as such it is liable to be quashed. From the perusal of the appellate order dated 21.11.1995 Annexure A-2 it is apparent that it is not a speaking (reasoned) order. In Ram Chandra v. Union of India, AIR 1986 SC 1173 it has been held by the Supreme Court that the Appellate Authority discharging quasi-judicial functions in accordance with natural justice must give reasons for its decision. In view of the aforesaid, r quash the order dated 21.11.1995 Annexure A-2 of the Appellate Authority (respondent No.2) and direct the Appellate Authority (respondent No.2) to reconsider the appeal of the delinquent employee on merits and thereafter pass a speaking order (reasoned order) in accordance with law as early as possible but not later than a period of two months from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is finally disposed of but without any order as to costs.