JUDGMENT Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J. - It is rather unfortunate that the appeals filed by the petitioner(s) having been remanded back to the Appellate Authority as far as back on 29.05.2014, the Appellate Authority has been totally oblivious of its duties in complying with the mandate of law as also the directions passed by this Court. 2. A learned Division Bench of this Court had also found that the Appellate Authority while passing an impugned order dated 17.10.2013 had dismissed the petitioners'' appeals without assigning any reason. It found the order to be cryptic and, therefore, quashed the said order whereby directions were issued to the Appellate Authority to consider and decide the petitioners'' cases afresh in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing to all concerned. 3. No doubt, the petitioner(s) were afforded opportunity of hearing, however, the fact remains that the order as passed by the Appellate Authority is still cryptic and bereft of any reason. The only ground for rejecting the plea of the petitioner(s) is that because of the allegations set out against them, the reputation of the Board has been tarnished. Obviously, this in itself could not be a ground for rejecting the appeals filed by the petitioner(s). 4. Accordingly, both these petitions are allowed. The Appellate Authority is directed to decide the appeals filed by the petitioner(s) afresh after rendering point-wise findings to the issues raised in the appeals. The needful be done by 20th February, 2020 after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner(s). 5. Pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. Copy ''dasti''.