JUDGMENT : DEEPAK ROSHAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties through V.C. 2. The instant application has been preferred by the petitioner for quashing the order as contained in Memo No. 2656 dated 01.08.2014, whereby the petitioner has been awarded the punishment of censure. 3. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. While the petitioner was posted as Assistant Registrar Cooperative Society Jamshedpur Circle, Jamshedpur, he was put under suspension and was posted as the Joint Registrar Cooperative Societies, North Pargana Division, Dumka. He was served with the charge sheet vide letter dated 26.07.2013 and was asked to show cause in the light of the charges leveled against him. The petitioner submitted his show cause vide letter dated 08.08.2013 (Annexure-C to the counter affidavit). However, the petitioner was served with the impugned order dated 01.08.2014 whereby he was awarded the punishment of censure. 4. Mr. Sachin Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order deserves to be quashed and set aside inasmuch as it has been passed on the basis of report sent by Registrar Cooperative Society. The impugned order itself shows that the disciplinary authority while passing the impugned order has not applied its independent mind rather acted upon the report of the Registrar Cooperative Society Jharkhand. Even the Registrar Cooperative Society Jharkhand has taken a report from his office. He further submits that the person who has issued the show-cause notice and inflicted punishment did not apply his mind as such, the impugned order is not sustainable in the eye of law. 5. Mr. Raunak Sahay, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner had been inflicted the punishment of censure in the year 2014 and as per the Jharkhand Government Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2016 (herein after to be referred as Service Rules) the adverse effect of censure on the confirmation and promotion of Government servant shall be one year from the date of issue of the order as such, in the year 2020 the effect of the impugned order does not survive and the instant writ application has become infructuous. 6. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the material available on record it appears that though the period of censure is one year in view of the Service Rules and the effect of punishment will be only one year but admittedly, the said punishment will be entered in the service record of the petitioner. 7. An order of censure is a formal and public act intended to convey that the person concerned has been guilty of some blameworthy act or omission for which it has been found necessary to award him a formal punishment, and nothing can amount to a censure unless it is intended to be such a formal punishment and imposed for good and sufficient reason after following the prescribed procedure. A record of the punishment so imposed is kept on the officer's confidential roll. 8. From perusal of the impugned order it would appear that the disciplinary authority has not considered the show-cause submitted by the petitioner and passed the impugned order on the report of Registrar Cooperative Society without applying his independent mind. Not even a single line has been mentioned in the impugned order which could transpire that the disciplinary authority has applied his independent mind on the show cause filed by the petitioner. There would be no exaggeration in saying that the impugned order is non reasoned and non speaking order for the obvious reason that the satisfaction of the disciplinary authority is not there as to on what basis the disciplinary authority has found the petitioner guilty of the charge and awarded the punishment of censure. Needless to say, the censure is a minor punishment as such, it has to be imposed for good and sufficient reason after following the procedures which is absent in the instant case. 9. In this view of the aforesaid facts, without agreeing with the contention the learned counsel for the respondents that since the period of one year has passed from the date of the punishment as such, the instant writ application has become infructuous, I hereby quash and set aside the impugned order dated 01.08.2014 as contained in Annexure-1 whereby the petitioner has been awarded punishment of Censure. As a result thereof, the instant application is allowed.