1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 29/06/2011 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE K.VENKATARAMAN Writ Petition (MD) No.6887 of 2011 V.Murugan ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Inspector General of Police, Southern region, Madurai. 2.The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Tirunelveli Range, Tirunelveli. 3.The Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari Region, Kanyakumari District. 4.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari Region, Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorari to call for the records of the second respondent in his proceedings in C.No.C4/AP.07/2010 dated 15.03.2010 and quash the same as illegal and violation of principles of law. For petitioner ...Mr.K.M.Boopathy For Respondents ...Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen Addl. Government Pleader O R D E R Challenging the impugned order of the second respondent dated 15.03.2010, an order confirming the punishment imposed on the petitioner, the present writ petition is filed. 2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 3. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final hearing. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner mainly contended that the impugned order has been passed by the second respondent without any reasoning and hence it is liable to be set aside. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 5. Though the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents sought to support the order, he is unable to point out from the impugned order that the second respondent has given reasons while dismissing the appeal preferred by the petitioner. 6. The appellate authority is expected to pass orders giving reasons for either agreeing or disagreeing with the orders passed by the original authority. However, he has not done so. He has simply stated that he has gone through the relevant papers and came to the conclusion that the appeal deserves to be dismissed. Such one line order is unknown to law. 7. This Court, while dealing with a similar question, in K.KANDASAMY Vs. DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, TIRUCHIRAPALLI RANGE, TIRUCHIRAPALLI AND ANOTHER reported in (2006) 4 MLJ – 1382 has held as follows:- "7. It is seen from the aforesaid portion of the impugned order that the Appellate Authority did not deal with any of the grounds of appeal raised by the petitioner. A departmental appeal is a continuation of the original proceedings. It is needless to point out that the last opportunity available for a delinquent, to canvass his case on merits, is at the appellate stage. After the appeal, a delinquent loses his right to challenge any disciplinary proceedings on merits, since the scope of interference on a revision or on a writ petition is very limited. Therefore, the rules themselves contemplate appellate authorities to go into the factual details and consider all the grounds of appeal before deciding an appeal. Unfortunately, the first respondent has chosen to dismiss the appeal by a non-speaking order and hence the appellate authorities order is liable to be set aside. 8. A similar question came up for consideration before this Court in Arokiadoss v. The Deputy Commissioner of Police, Law and Order (South), Madras-8 and Anr. 1989 W.L.R. 274. In the said case also, an identical order similar to the one involved in the present case was passed by the Appellate Authority. Therefore, after considering the scope of the powers conferred upon the Appellate Authority, this Court held as follows in paragraph-3: Rule 6(1) of the Tamil Nadu Police Subordinate Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955 reads as follows: In the case of an appeal against an order imposing any penalty specified in Rule 2, the appellate authority shall consider-- (a) Whether the facts on which the order was based have been established; (b) Whether the facts established afford sufficient ground for taking action, and (c) Whether the penalty is excessive, adequate or inadequate, and after such consideration shall pass orders as it thanks proper. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 The rule enjoins the concerned authority to consider the three aspects set out therein specifically. Unless the appellate authority considers them it cannot be said that it has carried out its duties properly. The Supreme Court had occasion to discuss a similar question under Rule 27 (2) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965. Dealing with the word 'consider' used in the said rule, the Supreme Court observed that the word 'consider' implies due application of mind-vide R.P. Bhatt v. Union of India MANU/SC/0193/1982. The following paragraph in the above judgment of the Supreme Court can be usefully referred to with advantage-- The word 'consider' in Rule 27(2) implies 'due application of mind'. It is clear upon the terms of Rule 27(2) that the appellate authority is required to consider (1) whether the procedure laid down in the Rules has been complied with; and if not, whether such non-compliance has resulted in violation of any provisions of the Constitution or in failure of justice; (2) Whether the findings of the disciplinary authority are warranted by the evidence on record; and (3) Whether the penalty imposed is adequate; and thereafter pass orders confirming, enhancing etc, the penalty, or may remit back the case to the authority which imposed the same. Rule 27 (2) casts a duty on the appellate authority to consider the relevant factors set forth in Clauses (a), (b) and (c) thereof. There is no indication in the impugned order that the Director General was satisfied as to whether the procedure laid down in the Rules had been complied with and if not, whether such non-compliance had resulted in violation of any of the provisions of the Constitution or in failure of justice. We regret to find that the Director General has also not given any finding on the crucial question as to whether the findings of the disciplinary authority were unwarranted by the evidence on record. It seems that he only applied his mind to the requirement of Clause (2) of Rule 27(2) viz., whether the penalty imposed was adequate or justified in the facts and circumstances of the present case. There being non-compliance with the requirements of Rule 27(2) of the Rules, the impugned order passed by the Director General is liable to be set aside. 9. Thus it is clear that the appellate authority's order is in violation of the rules relating to disposal of appeals and consequently, it is liable to be set aside. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed. The order passed by the first respondent dated 29.9.1995 is set aside and the matter remitted back to the first respondent for a fresh disposal on merits in accordance with law and the said exercise shall be completed by the first respondent within a period of four months from the date of receipt or production of a copy of this order. No costs." https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4 7. In view of the above stated position, I am inclined to set aside the impugned order of the second respondent dated 15.03.2010 and the writ petition stands allowed. It is needless to say that the second respondent is at liberty to pass orders afresh, after giving reasons thereof and also after hearing the petitioner. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. RR Sd/- Assistant Registrar[CO] /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Inspector General of Police, Southern region, Madurai. 2.The Deputy Inspector General of Police, Tirunelveli Range, Tirunelveli. 3.The Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari Region, Kanyakumari District. 4.The Deputy Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari Region, Kanyakumari District. 5.The Section Officer, VR. Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.23 +1 cc to the Special Government Pleader, SR.No.20883. +1 cc to Mr.K.M.Boopathy, Advocate SR.No.21062. W.P.(MD) No.6887 of 2011 ad M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2011 DateD:29.06.2011 4P/8C RPB 22.07.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/