JUDGMENT By the Court.—Heard Sri Manish Misra, learned counsel for petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondents. 2. This writ petition has been filed against judgment and order dated 5.2.2001 passed by State Public Services Tribunal in Claim Petition No. 100/V/1993 whereby Tribunal has dismissed claim petition insofar as order of punishment dated 29.2.1992 imposing punishment of removal was challenged by claimant-petitioner but with regard to payment of subsistence allowance during the period of suspension, Tribunal has given direction to respondents. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that a copy of inquiry report was supplied to petitioner and show-cause notice was given to him to which petitioner also submitted his reply on 14.2.1992 but in the punishment order dated 29.2.1992, Punishing Authority has said that petitioner fails to submit reply and punishment order has been passed without considering petitioner’s reply dated 14.2.1992. This ground was taken before Tribunal but it has misread pleadings and documents and has observed that punishment order has been passed after considering petitioner’s reply. 4. The findings recorded by Tribunal read as under: **;gh ugha tkWp vk[;k izkIr gksus ij Lo;a ;kph ds vuqlkj mls dkj.k crkvks uksfVl fnukad 07-02-1992 Hkh miyC/k djk;h x;h ftldk mRrj Hkh mlus fn;k vkSj mlds i'pkr~ gh fookfnr vkns'k ikfjr gqvkA vr% mijksDr ls ;gh ifjyf{kr gksxk fd ;kph ds fo:) dh x;h foHkkxh; tkWp esa u dsoy mls lfEefyr fd;k x;k cfYd mlds fo:) fd;s tkus okys lk{; ls iw.kZr% voxr djk;k vkSj mls vius cpko esa Hkh lk{; nsus dk volj iznku fd;k x;k rRi'pkr~ mls dkj.k crkvks uksfVl nh x;h ftldk Hkh mlus mRrj fn;k vkSj lc rF;ksa dks /;ku esa j[krs gq, n.Mkns'k ikfjr fd;k x;kA vr% ;g ekuus dk dksbZ lE;d vk/kkj ugha gS fd ;kph dks mlds cpko dk lE;d volj iznku ugha fd;k x;kA** “Not only this, according to petitioner himself, on receiving the inquiry report, show-cause notice dated 7.2.1992 had also been made available to him and its reply too had been submitted by him and only thereafter impugned order was passed. Therefore from above, it would transpire that in the departmental inquiry proceeded against petitioner, not only he was got participated in it rather he was fully made aware of all evidences proposed against him and he was also given opportunity to put evidence in his defence thereafter he was served with show-cause notice and he submitted his reply too; and considering all the facts, punishment order has been passed. Therefore, there is no reasonable ground to presume that petitioner has not been afforded reasonable opportunity to defend himself.” (English Translation by Court) 5. Apparently, Tribunal’s order shows that reply submitted by petitioner to show-cause notice dated 7.2.1992 was admitted by respondents and Tribunal has observed that Punishing Authority has considered the reply but punishment order itself shows that Punishing Authority did not consider reply since it has taken the stand that petitioner has not submitted any representation/reply at all to show-cause notice dated 7.2.1992. 6. This finding of Tribunal is contrary to record and vitiates impugned judgment. Similarly, once reply of petitioner dated 14.2.1992 was admitted by respondent before Tribunal, punishment order also cannot be sustained, since it is evident that order of punishment was passed without considering petitioner’s reply dated 14.2.1992. 7. Writ petition is accordingly allowed. Impugned judgment and order dated 5.2.2001 as well as order of punishment dated 29.2.1992 is hereby set aside and matter is remanded to Disciplinary Authority to pass fresh order in accordance with law after considering petitioner’s reply dated 14.2.1992 which he had submitted after receiving the show-cause notice dated 7.2.1992. 8. Question of consequential benefits, if any, will be determined in the light of ultimate order passed by Punishing Authority pursuant to above directions given in the judgment. 9. Since this is an old matter, Competent Authority is directed to comply with the aforesaid order within three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.