IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civl Writ Petition No.9993 of 2011 Date of Decision : May 31, 2011. Jaswant Singh .....Petitioner versus The State of Punjab and another .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.R.K.Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.J.S.Puri, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. Mr.J.S.Puri, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. In view of the nature of order which I propose to pass, there is no need to seek any counter reply from the respondents at this stage. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 15.3.2011 (Annexure-5) passed by the Financial Commissioner Development and Principal Secretary, Government of Punjab, Agriculture Department, imposing a punishment of recovery of Rs.1,14,219/- out of the pensionary benefits of the petitioner who has retired from the post of Sole CWP No.9993 of 2011 [2] Conservation Officer. It is true that under the Punjab Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1970, recovery of pecuniary loss caused by a Government employee is a minor punishment under Rule 5 (iii), however, even a minor punishment can be imposed only for good and valid reasons to be assigned after considering the defence plea taken by the delinquent employee. It has to be kept in view that many a times minor punishments have also serious civil consequences, therefore, it becomes imperative upon the disciplinary authority to apply its mind on all the issues raised before it and come out with a reasoned order. No such exercise has been undertaken while passing the impugned order. For the reasons given above, the writ petition is allowed; the impugned order dated 15.3.2011 (Annexure P-5) is set-aside with a direction to the competent authority to afford an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner and thereafter only, consider all his contentions and dispose of his claim by passing a speaking order. Dasti. May 31, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE